| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1hobo_magicFeb 08, 2010 13:17:37 | So i'm making a melee cleric for greek themed game. Mostly for thematic reasons he's a long spear wielding priest of posiden. The build isnt really optimal (cleric 5/ Ordained champ/ stormlord) so i'm trying to make the most out of my feats. The DM is letting me use shield and pike style with a heavy shield, so right now they look like this: Human cleric war and weather. non-realms 1. Cleric 1: Improved Shield Bash, Shield and Pike style 2. Cleric 2 3. Cleric 3: Shield Specialization 4. Cleric 4: 5. Cleric 5: Agile shield fighter 6. OC 1: ??????? What I'm trying to figure out is what to do after this. Should I go for a lockdown and maximize my AoO or stick with the power attack/charge route? The AoO route requires i put some points in dex that i'd rather not, but is very attractive from a crowd control perspective since I'm the group's primary melee-er. There's no TOB, but i can get pretty much any officially released feat. Any tips? |
| #2phaedrusxyFeb 08, 2010 14:11:06 | Just how low is your Dex? 14 is probably high enough. I rarely see the need for more than three attacks of opportunity per round. The Stand Still feat is invaluable for Lockdown builds. It's from Expanded Psionics, but is not a psionic feat. |
| #3aelryinthFeb 09, 2010 18:34:01 | A lockdown build is centered on generating attacks by AoO and having the muscle to do something with them. You need combat reflexes and probably Thicket of Blades + Stand Still to have any viable hope of being a control build. Agile shield fighter is for people bashing with a shield. It's a waste of a feat in either incarnation for you...either you are charging for one big attack or using your reach weapon to stand still things. Don't even THINK about tripping. Drop Agile Shield fighter. Hells, drop most of your feats and try to get extended or persistent clerical buffs if you are trying to be a melee cleric. You've got enough problems with poor BAB and substandard strength, you have to leverage your spells. Extra turning and Cha boosters and items are going to be the standard of the day. Divine Power, Might and Luck combine to make you a decent melee machine, and you can always choose to indulge other effects. ===Aelryinth |
| #4phaedrusxyFeb 09, 2010 19:20:19 | He specifically said no Tome of Battle. So Thicket of Blades is out of the question. It is hardly impossible to make a BFC build without it. People have been making them for years... It just makes them better. Combat Reflexes + Stand Still will stop pretty much all but the tumblers. Get a pair of steadfast boots to stick it to the chargers, also. |
| #5streamoftheskyFeb 10, 2010 15:09:15 | OP, can you be a dwarf, or is human required? Dwarves get a lot of nice abilities to go toe to toe with monsters. Their free weapons help, too. If you definitely want a spear type weapon, unfortunately the war axe proficiency won't much help you. Then again, in Races of Stone, there's the Dwarven Warpike, which is similar to a halberd in appearance (but much, much better). RoS also has a note about DMs allowing races to get different racial weapon proficiencies, so you could pissibly get the warpike proficiency for free. If you insist on doing shield and pike style (if you don't care about fighting with the Shield, nothing keeps Improved Buckler Defense or an Animated Shield from protecting you while 2-handing the pike)...I guess your build is fine as is. If you want to do lockdown, you'd be better off with a weapon you can trip with. Lockdown's also kind of pointless if you lack a decent dex score, Combat Reflexes, and Stand Still, as a bare minimum. If you want to do a charge and PA build, you'd be much better off going 2-handed for double power attack. One other note: check out C.Warrior. I recall that book having a few Shield Slam feats that might be useful to you. |
| #6aelryinthFeb 10, 2010 20:52:10 | As written, Improved Buckler Defense does not help a THW fighter. It functions if you are wielding a weapon in your off hand. Two handing a weapon is NOT wielding a weapon in your off hand. Mechanically, its almost the exact same thing as Improved Shield Bash, except you don't bash with the buckler, but the weapon in your off hand. It has no usefulness to a THW fighter. Animated Shield cheese for them! If you want to rule them as THW being 'wielded in the off hand', then they are two weapon fighting with one big weapon, and have to obey the TWF rules. I.e. without TWF, they are -4 to hit on all attacks, and with it, they are -2 to hit. Choke on that, Greatsword guys. I.e. you can't have your cake and eat it, too. If you're wielding a weapon in your off hand' with no penalties and no feat required, then TWF should be able to do the same. ==Aelryinth |
| #7bruceleeroyFeb 11, 2010 2:06:44 | Two handing a weapon is, obviously, wielding a weapon with your off hand. And your main hand. In fact, BOTH of them! Wow! How about that? With a Two handed weapon, you're wielding it with TWO hands! And one of them is what is referred to in the rules as an "off hand". It works. You just like to argue, aelryinth. |
| #8aelryinthFeb 11, 2010 10:39:33 | Two handing a weapon is, obviously, wielding a weapon with your off hand. And your main hand. In fact, BOTH of them! Wow! How about that? With a Two handed weapon, you're wielding it with TWO hands! And one of them is what is referred to in the rules as an "off hand". Two handed is NOT wielding a weapon in your off hand. If it was, then you'd be using the TWF rules. WOW, isn't that obvious? Go look at the rules. If you are wielding a weapon in your off hand, as you posit, you are TWF. Kindly apply the penalties. Watch all the Greatsworders scream at -4 TH/attack. And only getting one attack, cause they can't get iteratives without taking the TWF tree. That would be impossible since they can't get extra attacks with the off hand, meaning they'd be using a greatsword in one hand, which is impossible. So, make your choice. If you think THW fighting is 'wielding a weapon in the off hand', apply TWF penalties as the rules clearly state, and you can take IBD. If you don't want the penalty, then obviously THW is not the same thing as TWF,and you don't get the feat. As I noted, IBD is the reverse of Improved Shield Bash, which also is a form of TWF. Greatsworders don't get to bend the rules to suit themselves, sorry. No cake and eat it too, sorry. ==Aelryinth |
| #9papuFeb 11, 2010 10:53:11 | BucklerThis small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a -1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you don’t get the buckler’s AC bonus for the rest of the round. |
| #10aelryinthFeb 11, 2010 14:34:29 |
Except the feat doesn't cite the Buckler rule. It specificially says, "wielding a weapon in your off hand", it does NOT use the "Help wield a two-handed weapon" language. It doesn't even use the "shield arm to wield a weapon" language. Ergo, no, THW does not apply, because THW doesn't involve wielding a weapon in your off hand, it involves wielding a weapon in both hands. ==Aelryinth |
| #11streamoftheskyFeb 12, 2010 0:47:20 | "Ergo, no, THW does not apply, because THW doesn't involve wielding a weapon in your off hand, it involves wielding a weapon in both hands." I'm sure you just love semantics, but...do you even realize how dumb that sounds? Tell me where in this line of logic you disagree and why: 1. Wielding a 2H weapon means wielding the weapon in both hands. 2. Wielding a weapon in both hands = wielding the weapon in main hand + wielding the weapon in off-hand. 3. Therefore, to wield a 2H weapon is to wield a weapon in your off-hand. |
| #12aelryinthFeb 13, 2010 11:47:43 | "Ergo, no, THW does not apply, because THW doesn't involve wielding a weapon in your off hand, it involves wielding a weapon in both hands." And since you are now insisting on wielding a weapon in your off hand, welcome to the TWF rules. Take your -4 to hit for wielding a non-small weapon in your off hand, and enjoy it. Because thems the rules for 'wielding a weapon in your off hand.' Can't have your cake and eat it too. ==Aelryinth |
| #13waazraathFeb 13, 2010 13:50:08 | Isn't there any place where we can get a definitive answer on this? I've seen this discussion pass by several times now, without a conclusion. It's not really clear... obviously (well, not too obviously in dnd maybe) one has 2 hands, so when one hand is an off hand and another not, then when wielding a weapon in both hands, it's also wielded in the off hand. But the term "off hand" is used as far as I know only used in relation to fighting with 2 weapons. That suggests for me that with off hand is meant "the hand in which you wield your second weapon". As a DM, I wouldn't let a 2handed weapon user use the feat because of that. It would be different if someboy could point me out an "off hand" in any skill, spellcasting or other rule. |
| #14streamoftheskyFeb 13, 2010 14:13:00 | "Ergo, no, THW does not apply, because THW doesn't involve wielding a weapon in your off hand, it involves wielding a weapon in both hands." No...the penalties are for two weapon fighting, not wielding a weapon in your off hand. Let's try again...if you're not wielding a two handed weapon in two hands, what are you doing with it? Waaz: The only other instance of an off hand being used in the rules aside from TWF that i can think of at the moment is the Einhander feat, which gives benefits for using a single one handed weapon and switching between the hand you use to attack with it. |
| #15phaedrusxyFeb 13, 2010 20:44:44 | And since you are now insisting on wielding a weapon in your off hand, welcome to the TWF rules. Take your -4 to hit for wielding a non-small weapon in your off hand, and enjoy it. Because thems the rules for 'wielding a weapon in your off hand.' Actually, you only take the penalties if you actually use the off-hand weapon to make an extra attack. You could technically make an iterative attack with your "off hand" and not take any penalty at all for doing so. I'm sure many people house rule otherwise, but nothing in the rules prohibits it. |
| #16aelryinthFeb 13, 2010 20:51:06 | Wielding a weapon in your off hand is nowhere defined as a subset of wielding a Two Handed weapon. Nor is it defined as an intersection of TWF and THW. The only place the two come together is with the buckler rules, where they specifically call out THW fighters able to strap on a buckler seperately...despite using the 'wield off hand' language. Ergo, THW is not inclusive of the definition, it was an exception. Improved Buckler Defense does NOT repeat that language. IBD is a TWF equivalent of Improved Shield Bash...which also is not available to THW users. ===Aelryinth |
| #17streamoftheskyFeb 13, 2010 23:13:40 | IBD is a TWF equivalent of Improved Shield Bash...which also is not available to THW users. No. Improved Shield Bash is unavailable to a 2HW fighter because he cannot hold a shield large enough to use for bashing. Nothing about using a 2H weapon stops him from using ISB if he has a free hand for the light/heavy shield. Say...he gets buffed with Girallon's Blessing. Also curious, if you're so adamant that the 2H weapon user is not wielding the weapon in his off-hand, does he still suffer the -1 attack penalty for having a buckler strapped to an arm that is NOT wielding the weapon? The feat doesn't spell out that "yes, 2H weapons are considered to be wielded in your off-hand and can benefit from this feat" because it doesn't have to. It's both common sense, and is spelled out in the text for bucklers, the item which the feat itself applies to: “You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a -1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you don’t get the buckler’s AC bonus for the rest of the round.”
Why, when the feat is in reference to an item in the PH, which the C.Warrior book assumes you to have access to (as noted in the beginning part where it says what other books are needed to use this one, not to mention it’s open content), would they need to AGAIN spell out that your off hand is wielding a two handed weapon and thus the feat also helps those fighters? |
| #18aelryinthFeb 14, 2010 18:51:23 | You are taking the exact opposite tack that I am. They are spelling out the rule because it is an obvious exception, not because its the default ruling. The feat goes with the default ruling. That is fine because a THW guy can't wield his weapon AT ALL while getting the buckler bonus, while a TWF still has his main weapon, he's switching back and forth between AC and a second attack. Your interpretation jumps this TWO degrees. The THW guy goes from no dmg to full damage + AC, and the TWF guys goes from AC or dmg to full dmg + AC. Sorry, that just doesn't wash. It's not balanced, it's not the intent, and the language doesn't support your view. I don't care if a THW wants to take a -1 to hit all the time so he can have a shield available if he wants to go defensive. I have a real problem with him getting all the benefits of a TWF guy, a SAB guy, and the best dmg of the THW guy. The feat simply does not do what you say it does. It's a TWF feat, that's all. And it's not imbalanced at all because it's the direct equivalent of Improved Shield Bash. ==Aelryinth |
| #19streamoftheskyFeb 15, 2010 2:30:34 | You are taking the exact opposite tack that I am. They are spelling out the rule because it is an obvious exception, not because its the default ruling. The feat goes with the default ruling. Yes, I am taking the completely opposite tack than you. Bucklers have their own rules. But then anything branching off of that (rules pertaining to bucklers) would treat the buckler rules as the default. You clearly disagree. That is fine because a THW guy can't wield his weapon AT ALL while getting the buckler bonus, while a TWF still has his main weapon, he's switching back and forth between AC and a second attack. I wasn't really concerned with fairness or balance much at all, actually. Not that I'm against such things, but it just wasn't my concern for THW users being able to take IBD versus my concern over common sense. Feats and abilities will always be better for some than others. Getting +1d6 sneak attack is a whole lot more useful if you have the TWF tree as opposed to the Power Attack tree. And really, IBD for a TWF using identical weapons is just as much of a spit in the face to S&B two-weapon fighters (who don't have the benefit of weapon feats applying to both weapons) as you're claiming allowing it for a THW user would be towards a TWF user, if not greater. Sorry, that just doesn't wash. It's not balanced, it's not the intent, and the language doesn't support your view. I don't care if a THW wants to take a -1 to hit all the time so he can have a shield available if he wants to go defensive. I have a real problem with him getting all the benefits of a TWF guy, a SAB guy, and the best dmg of the THW guy. Man, must really suck for you that with the core rules you can play a greatsword wielding fighter in spiked armor with an animated shield and the TWF tree and make a "pure" TWF or S&B user cry. As far as balance goes, IBD for a THW fighter at mid to late levels is probably not even worth the feat versus just paying for an animated shield. It's only really worth getting for early levels when an animated shield is unaffordable. Ironically, lower levels is where a TWF stacks up best with a THW fighter: enemies have low hp and seldom have DR, so doing crazy high damage to one target is often unnecessary; having an extra attack means a lot more when you only get one base attack. The feat simply does not do what you say it does. It's a TWF feat, that's all. And it's not imbalanced at all because it's the direct equivalent of Improved Shield Bash. If it were a TWF feat, it'd require TWF. And I also disagree that it's a direct equivalent of ISB, as I noted before. But we're not going to convince ourselves, and we're kind of jacking this thread. Truce? New thread otherwise? |
| #20tytalusFeb 17, 2010 10:55:48 |
The cited RAW clearly states that wielding a 2-handed weapon is using your off hand to wield a weapon. Ergo, IBD works just fine with such a weapon. It does not need to cite the buckler rules at all. |
| #21aelryinthFeb 17, 2010 19:09:10 | The rule does nothing of the sort. It lists an exception to the rule allowing a buckler wearer to wear it. Improved Buckler Defense says if you wield a weapon in your off-hand. It' does NOT say "and that includes using your off-hand to wield a THW. Wielding a weapon in your off hand is a very narrow and careful statement, and not expanded upon. ==Aelryinth |
| #22papuFeb 18, 2010 3:42:04 | Quote form IBD: You know, two handed weapon is normal weapon but holded two handed. |
| #23tytalusFeb 23, 2010 8:26:57 |
That might be clear to you and me, but you are talking to a guy who claims a dagger used for throwing and the same dagger used for melee are two different weapons: one is supposedly a light thrown weapon, and the other a light weapon. I am not kidding. |
| #24aelryinthFeb 24, 2010 21:39:11 | Usage means they fall under different rules. It's always been that way. Why is that even an argument? ==Aelryinth |