Being the power gamer I am, I've been browsing these forums. I've read a lot of comments about Clerics being good tanks, but I don't want to push that guy into being the tank. I told the party I would be the tank/fighter, and that is my plan. I understand a sword & board dwarf fighter can't really behave in the stereotypical tank role that we see in other games, so I'm willing to try something else.
It seems I can be a 2-handed human fighter and basically be just as good if not better than a 1h/shield fighter. But what other options are out there?
Pure Barb?
Barb/Fighter mix?
Pure druid? (I know absolutely NOTHING about druids. Never messed with them at all in my limited past)
We will be starting at level 1. Probably using a standard point buy system in the upper 20's (not confirmed by DM yet). We're hoping we can keep the group together long term and get into higher levels.
Any builds/tips/suggestions are greatly appreciated!
Hello all, some friends and I are going to start up our own long term D&D group. The DM is the only person that's really experienced. I have very little experience and the other 4 have none. I let the others choose their classes and we ended up with everything except a tank. (They're all going to be Wizard, Cleric, Thief & Bard)
Being the power gamer I am, I've been browsing these forums. I've read a lot of comments about Clerics being good tanks, but I don't want to push that guy into being the tank. I told the party I would be the tank/fighter, and that is my plan. I understand a sword & board dwarf fighter can't really behave in the stereotypical tank role that we see in other games, so I'm willing to try something else.
Good catch - and thanks for actually browsing around rather than just jumping in with a question. My first instinct was to point out how durable clerics are, even in core, but you're not the one playing him.
One side note: If you're self-identified as a power gamer but the other four may not be, consider having some teaching resources on hand for the other characters as well. The most important at the lowest levels is probably teaching the cleric how to heal (i.e. "You're probably not going to heal, especially if initiative is ticking"), while the most involved will be teaching the wizard to favor spells that actually work (i.e. Magic Missile no, Color Spray yes). Powergamers have a negative reputation, but we can act as wonderful educational resources as well.
It seems I can be a 2-handed human fighter and basically be just as good if not better than a 1h/shield fighter. But what other options are out there?
Pure Barb?
Barb/Fighter mix?
Pure druid? (I know absolutely NOTHING about druids. Never messed with them at all in my limited past)
We will be starting at level 1. Probably using a standard point buy system in the upper 20's (not confirmed by DM yet). We're hoping we can keep the group together long term and get into higher levels.
Any builds/tips/suggestions are greatly appreciated!
Here's my primer on what "tanking" actually means in D&D 3.5. (Look in the spoiler block.) It's a bit old but should still hold. I reference "responsibilities" instead of roles there, which is more or less referring to this sort of position. (I note your group is the classic Big Four Roles - Fighting Man, Magic-user, Priest, and Thief - supplemented by the classic Fifth Wheel of bard. Part of the strength of 3e is that you can view those roles as packages of responsibilities, and then redistribute the responsibilities in your team for a totally different playstyle.)
It's not core-only, though - it's more about how to think and what to look for. For one thing, your "tank" probably won't be wearing heavy armor and will have a polearm or spiked chain.
The "baseline" (i.e. designed for 25-point-buy, core-only games with zero houserules, seeing play from level 1 onward rather than starting at a higher level) melee defender is probably the Horizon Tripper, which is easy to learn to use and reasonably competent given the poor resources it has to work with. While it's built with a prestige class in mind, it starts working far sooner than that. It's got a good reputation (given those limits again) for a reason.
If you want to try something more ambitious with druid, it's doable as well but will feel quite different (since you'll be directing a war dog instead of wading into battle yourself).
My recommendation is to read the two links above and play the Horizon Tripper as a starting point.
I do kind of want to stick to the sterotypes. I hope you don't get mad at me for coming and asking for advice only to turn it down. I feel like I'm contradicting myself. It's hard to put in text.
So I guess I'm asking... is there any OTHER options? Do you think our group even needs a tank? Can I just play a pure melee dps class? I definitely see the value in killing faster to reduce damage, healing spells have always seemed very puny to me in D&D. Should I switch and be a cleric tank, and allow the other guy to play something else?
I do kind of want to stick to the sterotypes. I hope you don't get mad at me for coming and asking for advice only to turn it down. I feel like I'm contradicting myself. It's hard to put in text.
I'm one of the least argumentative regulars here, and I frequently point out that one of the goals of practical optimization is to respect the parameters of the request. If you want to stick to a stereotypical warrior with sword and shield, then that's what we do (with caveats that we aren't miracle workers).
So I guess I'm asking... is there any OTHER options? Do you think our group even needs a tank? Can I just play a pure melee dps class? I definitely see the value in killing faster to reduce damage, healing spells have always seemed very puny to me in D&D. Should I switch and be a cleric tank, and allow the other guy to play something else?
I would stop thinking of classes as prepackaged self-contained roles and start thinking of them as building blocks towards your ultimate goals. The Horizon Tripper, for instance, combines ranger skills with barbarian fast movement and a fighter bonus feat to accomplish its goal, and it's still got a consistent narrative arc through all of it.
Your use of the term "dps", combined with that particular party distribution, suggests to me that you're coming to D&D from video games, which follow a very different set of logic. In video games, "aggro" is something that can be managed and controlled, whlie that same thing cannot be directly done in D&D. Instead, the closest parallel is "Action control" (giving yourself more actions than the enemy, typically by denying them theirs) and "Battlefield Control" (dictating which actions can be taken at particular places or times, thus limiting what actions your enemies DO get). 3.5 does this in melee through attacks of opportunity, but if you're avoiding reach weapons, there goes that idea (unless you increase your size).
"dps" in D&D generally means Killing Power - which is itself actually a form of action control, since dead enemies can't act. I call it "Killing Power" instead of "Damage potential" or whatever because it doesn't matter how much damage you can do - if the enemy survives until his next turn, the amount of damage you dealt may as well be 0, since he'll be able to attack just as well. Meanwhile, an attack that instasplats enemies means that those enemies don't get a chance to fight back on your next turn.
Mind you, it's VERY difficult to do this in a core game (the absolute must-have feats for melee damage include Shock Trooper, in Complete Warrior, closely followed by any multiplier you can find). The best you can do is look up Power Attack, learn to optimize it against particular AC values (this is a mathematically intense practice at times), and go from there. In core, the most powerful melee damage strike I know of is a mounted charge, but mounts have their own problems (I'd suggest playing a Small character who rides a Medium mount if you're doing this, so you can fit through most dungeon corridors - the -Strength and smaller base weapon damage is trivial compared to what Power Attack can give you with even a slight multiplier).
I'm kind of rambling here. I'm not entirely sure what I'd go for on here, but I don't have a clear picture of the kind of character you want to play either. Rememer that you do NOT need to conform to the same four roles printed in the D&D books of the 70s.
Well, again, we are only using PHB classes. So Horizon walker is out, and things like shock lance and leap attack I am not sure about. I assume if he want core classes only, then he probably only wants core feats as well.
Only PHB classes? You don't even get access to the PrCs in the DMG which are certainly CORE?
While would still consider playing something "sub-optimal" like a S&B character in a lower level game (I'm almost amazed certain negative aspects have stayed out of that thread although I specifically tried to leave them out as they are always right.) given your extreme restrictions you're going to want a Cleric or more likely a Druid to have any chance at min/maxing.
Well, again, we are only using PHB classes. So Horizon walker is out, and things like shock lance and leap attack I am not sure about. I assume if he want core classes only, then he probably only wants core feats as well.
1) You aren't starting at a horizon walker.
2) If the DMG is out, then he can't run the game.
3) The Horizon Tripper is perfectly capable in a core-only game at level 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 using only core classes. That's plenty of time for you to work towards that particular goal, which is in the book the DM is using to run the game.
Ignore all the ubercharge stuff like Shock Trooper; you'll never get it in core-only. You CAN get prestige classes eventually.
Of course, the fewer sources are available to you, the stronger the druid gets - to the point where in a core-only game, assuming average player skill across the board, a druid can curbstomp any enemy you come across with zero foreknowledge or prep time. Druids are better fighters than the fighters and better blasters than the mages in core-only settings, and I don't think your image of a fighter is a nature priest in hide armor wielding a bone club and turning into a bear.
Druid's Animal Companion tanks for him before that.
Not the easiest of classes to dive in, on first go.
But very very C.O. approved.
Fighter 2 + Barb 2 or Pally 2 + Ranger 2 + Rogue 2
... may seem strange, but dipping a set
of classes has proven quite effective.
In 3.5, there's no such thing as a tank. You have no actual method of forcing enemies to target you, rather than the, you know, actually dangerous people.
In Core D&D, maybe. I know that's what we're talking about, but there are ways to do that outside of it. Also, even just AoO tripping works as a sort of tanking. Yeah, a "tank" in an MMO is going to be someone who aggros and gets wailed on; you can't do that directly because "aggro" doesn't happen. However, if people are going to end up flat on their backs if they try and move away from you, it does the job. Depending on your definition of "Core", Stand Still is in the SRD as well.
Also, the various Summon Monster spells can be pretty good at "tanking" (it's hard to attack people if they're standing on the other side of a wall of giant Monstrous Centipede).
In Core D&D, maybe. I know that's what we're talking about, but there are ways to do that outside of it. Also, even just AoO tripping works as a sort of tanking. Yeah, a "tank" in an MMO is going to be someone who aggros and gets wailed on; you can't do that directly because "aggro" doesn't happen. However, if people are going to end up flat on their backs if they try and move away from you, it does the job. Depending on your definition of "Core", Stand Still is in the SRD as well.
Also, the various Summon Monster spells can be pretty good at "tanking" (it's hard to attack people if they're standing on the other side of a wall of giant Monstrous Centipede).
Remember who you are talking to. If you really want an optimized 'anything' it had better be built on a core of wizard, cleric, or druid style spellcasting.
No, in any D&D.
There's no way to force someone to attack you? There are plenty of incentives - AoOs, Iron Guard's Glare, Defensive Rebuke. If those don't float your boat, Goad and Mindless Rage both make people attack you instead of others (the former does not stop them from casting spells etc. but works fine against melee-ers).
There's nothing you have that forces the enemies with intelligence above six to actually care about you as opposed to the guys that actually kill ****.
Tripping/Stand Still isn't quite what people usually mean by "tank", no, but if a person has the option of attacking you or ending up flat on their back, it does the job.
lolno. It's just as eay to eat the centipede's AoO as it is to remove it.
We're talking about a literal "meat shield" here. Summon multiple centipedes in any kind of choke point, and the opponent physically can't get to you - who gives a damn about AoOs? The centipedes have a fair deal of HP for their level (and from SM3 up, DR) but even if you can kill one in a round, that's a round wasted, and you can't move over to complete your full attack if all you have is a 5ft step ("Huge" takes up a 15ft square). Hell, if you have enough centipedes, you could feasibly make a ring of them around the party.
A Tripper does the same thing, but with the problem of things being immune to trip that Lockdown does not have.
Another variant is Tempest's Pinball Brothers builds. You don't need to get enemies to attack you if you can just throw them around anywhere you want them so they can't attack anyone else.
==Aelryinth
In core, once you get Improved Trip and Combat Reflexes (and Stand Still, if it counts as core by being in the SRD), you can't really improve on lock tactics within the allowed books, and should probably diversify.
The first one is justand the second involves wasting a slot on that when you could cast an actually good spell instead. Great ideas, those.
I didn't say they were great ideas. I said they existed, when you claimed they didn't. They do, so you were wrong.
So now we're pretending tripping works past level eight or so?
Did I say we were operating exclusively at L9+?
You seem to think that A) The terrain will be in your favor, B) It'll actually matter to the enemies, C) they can't remove them with no work, and D) that that's a better action for a caster than actually, y'know, winning?
A) I said they "can" make effective meat shields; I didn't say this worked on all terrain. Besides, how often have you fought on wide open plains?
B) We're talking about being a meat shield. The concept of a meat shields doesn't really apply to non-melee anyway, to whom it will matter - unless they have infinite reach. Even then, at least you'd get soft cover (lame at higher levels, but it's a +4 AC and it blocks AoOs and stuff).
C) You can't remove them with no work. Anything you do counts as work, even if it's not very much.
D) Wrong again. I never said a caster should do that. I said he could, which he can.
Because there's obviously no such thing as swift action teleportation, that's totally impossible.
Those things are relatively thin on the ground in Core - especially for melee, which is what was being talked about (since one doesn't "tank" casters, at least not in the same way). You're also assuming that you can have swift action teleportation at the same level I get AoOs and reach (which is L1). You could in non-Core, as a caster (e.g. immediate magic) but, again, that's not what we're talking about. And even if they're not impossible, not everything you're going to fight will have them. It doesn't matter what your strategy is; a smart DM can beat it (most not-so-smart ones probably can too). That doesn't mean a given strategy is necessarily bad (or all strategies would be) just that it's not flawless.
The only way to stop a wizard is to have him within range of the attack...that generally means increased speed or teleportation ability of your own. Once he IS in range, it can be very, very hard for him to get out of it (Pierce Magical Concealment will do wonders, as will an Anti-Magic Torc).
But that's assuming you're going after the spellcasters. A Lockdown build isn't made to deal with attacks from way over yonder. It's made to prevent people/monsters from getting around and away from you, and forcing them to attack you...which is what a tank is supposed to do. A Tank isn't supposed to deal with ranged attacks...that's someone else's job.
==Aelryinth
And I agree, that wizard fleeing the fight and not contributing while his muscle gets locked down and carved up isn't really doing anything important.
==Aelryinth
The Animal Companion alone is a decent tank from levels 1-15, in the sense that it has a lot of hitpoints and you can hide behind it.
There are indeed no MMO tanks in D&D, in general there are very few ways to force an enemy to hit you, despite the exotic suggestions some make in this thread. In D&D you accoplish the same in another way, by controlling where the enemies move, known as "battlefield control".
The Druid and Wizard are very good at "battlefield control". Look at spells like Entangle and Wall of Thorns for Druids. If you can keep your enemies locked down, then your allies can kill them from a distance.
And by level 5 the druid gets Wildshape, and he can cast spells and be a tank and damage dealer at the same time.
Wear a Wild Dragonscale Fullplate when you can afford it, even if you're not proficient with it, and your armor class will be great in Wildshape. Give your Aimal Companion some barding to help it's armor class as well.
Animal Companions make great meat shields, because if they die, you get a new one after a day. Basically you've just doubled your hitpoints, with the limit that you need to wait 24 hours to get them back.