The best tanks are druids, clerics, favored souls, archivists, and arcane and psionic gishes. Basically you need to be a tier 1 or tier 2 to hang with the wizards, beguilers, other divine casters, etc.Meh, I disagree. A well-built crusader, warblade, or even other "lockdown" build can hang in there just fine with even a modicum of party support, especially below level 15 or so. D&D isn't about 1 on 1 duels.
How important is the feat Stand Still (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#standStill) in a lockdown build? I've seen it as potentially handy, but if I can do enough damage to prevent a guy from moving, I can probably help more by hurting him.Which is why, IMO, Knock-down and Knock-back are typically better feats, since they fulfill the same purpose (stopping movement), but you still deal your damage.
Designate Opponent (Ex): As a Swift Action, a Knight may mark an opponent as their primary foe. This foe must be within medium range and be able to hear the Knight's challenge. If the target creature inflicts any damage on the Knight before the Knight's next turn, the attempt fails. Otherwise, any attacks the Knight uses against the opponent during her next turn inflict an extra d6 of damage for each Knight level. This effect ends at the end of her next turn, or when she has struck her opponent a number of times equal to the number of attacks normally allotted her by her Base Attack Bonus.I noted that this was pretty much wholesale lifted (or coincedentally repeated, doesn't matter which) for use in 4.0, with the "marking" that melees did.
Example: Vayn is a 6th level Knight presently benefiting from a haste spell, granting her an extra attack during a Full Attack action. On her turn she designates an Ettin as her primary opponent, and the Ettin declines to attack her during the ensuing turn. When her next turn comes up, she uses a Full Attack and attacks 3 times. The first two hits inflict an extra 6d6 of damage, and then she designates the Ettin as her opponent again. It won't soon ignore her!
Yay to the WarshaperYou know that class does have some of the needed mechanics of being a tank. A crusader/warshaper, in even the basic martial healing stance can attack once with each type of natural attack iirc, at 2 healed per attack and maybe stone power at low levels thats a really game swinging thing.
A tank could be alot of things.. Really with the right preparation you could turn any class into a Tank. With my Druid I frequently end up tanking things without even trying.
I agree with all of the above. A tank is a viable option in 3.5e, but it's even better a full-caster.
The best tank I'd faced was a Psionic Gish PC with hilarious reach (30" or more), Stand Still, the Mage Slayer line of feats, and a REALLY powerful defence and offence. The guy could shut down an equal level PARTY all alone - and we were all optimized, heavily.
Tanking is about being a Battlefield Control spell, but doing it in a way that's better than any spell could - that is, being able to react to the situation, and alter your tactics.
I agree with all of the above. A tank is a viable option in 3.5e, but it's even better a full-caster.
The best tank I'd faced was a Psionic Gish PC with hilarious reach (30" or more), Stand Still, the Mage Slayer line of feats, and a REALLY powerful defence and offence. The guy could shut down an equal level PARTY all alone - and we were all optimized, heavily.
Tanking is about being a Battlefield Control spell, but doing it in a way that's better than any spell could - that is, being able to react to the situation, and alter your tactics.
Mind sharing the stats on that monster, Cantrip?
By the way, I've read that term used sometimes, but what would be multipouncing?That's getting more than one full attack on a charge.
Notice that the three things I set out above do not mean "heavily armored guys that takes hits for the party". They mean "guy that can stop the enemies from hitting the party and not be stopped from this task". Being hit is not a part of being a tank. Stopping your allies from being hit is.It does however, help if your tank can take hits, because if hes stopping enemies from hitting everyone else they're going to hitting him, and most 'tanks' can't even take one salvo.
A tank needs to be able to take some hits, but you're working off of the assumption that the enemies not being able to attack the tank's allies automatically means that they can target the tank. This isn't necessarily true. Some of the best ways to stop them from attacking allies leaves them unable to attack anyone, including the tank.Notice that the three things I set out above do not mean "heavily armored guys that takes hits for the party". They mean "guy that can stop the enemies from hitting the party and not be stopped from this task". Being hit is not a part of being a tank. Stopping your allies from being hit is.It does however, help if your tank can take hits, because if hes stopping enemies from hitting everyone else they're going to hitting him, and most 'tanks' can't even take one salvo.
The problem I have with the "nuclear deterrent" strategy of tanking is that, if the "tank" of the group is so threatening that he is able to focus fire on himself by the simple virtue that he can win the encounter by himself... then he can win the encounter by himself and doesn't need a party to protect. Worse, since D&D is a team game, the other members of his party will feel useless if the tank can kill everything without their assistance.
Your objection to tanks having working main guns is rooted in the screwed up design of 3.5, so I don't know what you want here.
So, what's wrong with tanks that daze, trip, bull rush, stun, etc. the enemies, but not so much damage? They stop the enemies from harming their teammates, but they don't end the encounter by themselves.
In 3.5, I think this is the form the "tank" needs to take to make it a team game.
A middle ground? Is there? Is there really?So, what's wrong with tanks that daze, trip, bull rush, stun, etc. the enemies, but not so much damage? They stop the enemies from harming their teammates, but they don't end the encounter by themselves.
In 3.5, I think this is the form the "tank" needs to take to make it a team game.
There's nothing wrong with that as long as the tank isn't able to dazetripknockback lock all the enemies all the time. Because, again, if that's the case he can just win every encounter by himself, it just takes longer. There's been a lot of talk over the years of the BSF being a Wizard's packmule/clean up crew, and it's been fairly established that the phenomenon is a Bad ThingTM. Which I would agree with. That doesn't make the solution to the problem turning the paradigm on its head and making the BSF the character that wins the encounter and his allies the packmules and clean up. That's just shifting the goal posts.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that characters can fail sometimes. That's why D&D is designed as a game for a party of 4 characters. A Tank doesn't have to be able to completely control every enemy in every round in every encounter to be effective. Any character with that degree of effectiveness in combat doesn't particularly benefit from having friends around. No character should be fully dependent on his allies to survive, but no character should be able to solo everything either. There is a middle ground.
That's why D&D is designed as a game for a party of 4 characters.Thats just patently untrue. Thats a holdover, and a holdover from Gygaxian times when dwarves couldn't use magic because "gimli wasn't a mage" and what have you.
The counterpoints are obvious: "well, he can't kill what he can't hit;" or "just mind rape him!" Of course, if those things are true of the tank, then he's not a very good tank is he? He's not much of a threat to the enemy if they can just fly around him or charm/compel/dominate him.
Thats just patently untrue. Thats a holdover, and a holdover from Gygaxian times when dwarves couldn't use magic because "gimli wasn't a mage" and what have you.
Well thats an aside, but, okay, in what book do dwarves get magic, in D&D?Thats just patently untrue. Thats a holdover, and a holdover from Gygaxian times when dwarves couldn't use magic because "gimli wasn't a mage" and what have you.
um. sorry, but back in the "gygaxian times" dwarves and elves were the only semi spell casters. sometimes only elves....
Well thats an aside, but, okay, in what book do dwarves get magic, in D&D?Thats just patently untrue. Thats a holdover, and a holdover from Gygaxian times when dwarves couldn't use magic because "gimli wasn't a mage" and what have you.
um. sorry, but back in the "gygaxian times" dwarves and elves were the only semi spell casters. sometimes only elves....
Interesting. . . I have the D&D basic paperback, from back then along with palace of the silver princess and the sinister secret of salt marsh, so I'm talking probably before that book. Gygaxian days may have been too big a reign.Well thats an aside, but, okay, in what book do dwarves get magic, in D&D?Thats just patently untrue. Thats a holdover, and a holdover from Gygaxian times when dwarves couldn't use magic because "gimli wasn't a mage" and what have you.
um. sorry, but back in the "gygaxian times" dwarves and elves were the only semi spell casters. sometimes only elves....
Hmm, I know for certain they could be clerics by the time Unearthed Arcana rolled out for 1e; not sure if they got it before then.
Small exceptions aside, 3e was it, far as I know.Interesting. . . I have the D&D basic paperback, from back then along with palace of the silver princess and the sinister secret of salt marsh, so I'm talking probably before that book. Gygaxian days may have been too big a reign.Well thats an aside, but, okay, in what book do dwarves get magic, in D&D?Thats just patently untrue. Thats a holdover, and a holdover from Gygaxian times when dwarves couldn't use magic because "gimli wasn't a mage" and what have you.
um. sorry, but back in the "gygaxian times" dwarves and elves were the only semi spell casters. sometimes only elves....
Hmm, I know for certain they could be clerics by the time Unearthed Arcana rolled out for 1e; not sure if they got it before then.
I guess I should say "In the first books" then. Though honestly I meant "Arcane Magic" giving no thought to divine magic at all.
So when was the first time you had a dwarf wizard?
Interesting. . . I have the D&D basic paperback, from back then along with palace of the silver princess and the sinister secret of salt marsh, so I'm talking probably before that book. Gygaxian days may have been too big a reign.Well thats an aside, but, okay, in what book do dwarves get magic, in D&D?Thats just patently untrue. Thats a holdover, and a holdover from Gygaxian times when dwarves couldn't use magic because "gimli wasn't a mage" and what have you.
um. sorry, but back in the "gygaxian times" dwarves and elves were the only semi spell casters. sometimes only elves....
Hmm, I know for certain they could be clerics by the time Unearthed Arcana rolled out for 1e; not sure if they got it before then.
I guess I should say "In the first books" then. Though honestly I meant "Arcane Magic" giving no thought to divine magic at all.
So when was the first time you had a dwarf wizard?
Moral of this story is that tanking in 3.5 is not possible. Either you can't do it in any meaningful way, so you fail; or you can, but if you can you have the ability at your command to solo every encounter and would thus be better off trying to do just about anything other than tanking.
Moral of this story is that tanking in 3.5 is not possible. Either you can't do it in any meaningful way, so you fail; or you can, but if you can you have the ability at your command to solo every encounter and would thus be better off trying to do just about anything other than tanking.
Ah. No. There's just too many abilities to account for. It's quite possible to be effective, without killing EVERYONE and preventing EVERYTHING.
[/spoiler]Come on Bkdubs123 "shouted down like an idiot" = needless hyperbole, and frankly as one of the people on this board who I think I share a mutual respect with, I'd like to think we should be above it.Moral of this story is that tanking in 3.5 is not possible. Either you can't do it in any meaningful way, so you fail; or you can, but if you can you have the ability at your command to solo every encounter and would thus be better off trying to do just about anything other than tanking.
Ah. No. There's just too many abilities to account for. It's quite possible to be effective, without killing EVERYONE and preventing EVERYTHING.
That's not what Midnight_v, Nachofan99, or Weenog seem to believe. I recall saying that it's okay for characters to fail sometimes and being shouted down like an idiot. I would be led to believe that if you can't kill everything all the time you're a bad tank.
A middle ground? Is there? Is there really?
Okay there might be a middle ground but THIS game doesn't support that.
That middle ground is illustrated in my mind by World of Warcraft I played it for a year or so till cataclysm came out, and no one can do important dungeons by themselves.
I'm not sure that I want to play that as a TTRPG.
That middle ground is a in my head very hard to broach right now in the 3.5 ruleset because of the way mosters interact and moreso because there are already characters via spell mostly that totally Do win encounters by themselves All(or at least a vast majority( of the time).
The concept of th tank just doesn't matter unless someone needs protecting.
Moral of this story is that tanking in 3.5 is not possible. Either you can't do it in any meaningful way, so you fail; or you can, but if you can you have the ability at your command to solo every encounter and would thus be better off trying to do just about anything other than tanking.
The fact still remains that D&D was designed for a 4 member party.
If there's no middle ground this must be true. If there is a middle ground, then let's talk about what that is instead of telling me that I'm wrong.I alredy started that from the begining.
That middle ground is a in my head very hard to broach right now in the 3.5 ruleset because of the way mosters interact and moreso because there are already characters via spell mostly that totally Do win encounters by themselves All(or at least a vast majority( of the time).
The concept of the tank just doesn't matter unless someone needs protecting.
For example, a lockdown tripper can make a good tank. But he can't automatically foil all actions all the time. He'll need assistance from his Wizard so he can see invisible dudes or whatever. The point is, he doesn't win encounters all by himself, and he's still a good tank. He protects his buddies because he actually needs their help as much as they need his protection. That's middle ground.Again, they don't need his protection. . . and that maybe the problem really. We KNOW they dont' really need his protection. At level 1 its ND tanking, because the fighter kiills everything in 1 hit with a greatsword, beyond that GOD is the tank, and if its as CatnipN suggests "It's about control" then Conjuration contains the tanking billet in the party.
So I'm walking away from what D&D is "supposed to be" ...
The Moral of the story that you put forth seem off is all, Tanking is not possible in 3.5 is not possible... for a variety of reasons, but mostly because of varied threats, and the fact that the people who don't need protecting can solo encounters all by themselves...
Maybe a good tank class design is one that is able to, as an extraordinary ability, literally embody some of the best battlefield control there is... I'll try and look into this.:twitch
Maybe a good tank class design is one that is able to, as an extraordinary ability, literally embody some of the best battlefield control there is... I'll try and look into this.You are one of the HOMEBREW MASTERS BK, even the things I dont' particuly care for that you make are well made however...
Moral of this story is that tanking in 3.5 is not possible. Either you can't do it in any meaningful way, so you fail; or you can, but if you can you have the ability at your command to solo every encounter and would thus be better off trying to do just about anything other than tanking.
Ah. No. There's just too many abilities to account for. It's quite possible to be effective, without killing EVERYONE and preventing EVERYTHING.
That's not what Midnight_v, Nachofan99, or Weenog seem to believe. I recall saying that it's okay for characters to fail sometimes and being shouted down like an idiot. I would be led to believe that if you can't kill everything all the time you're a bad tank.
Maybe a good tank class design is one that is able to, as an extraordinary ability, literally embody some of the best battlefield control there is... I'll try and look into this.:twitch
Don't rage... 9..8..7..3...2...1.
Rage: :shakefist
I'm so sick of that!
You are one of the HOMEBREW MASTERS BK
To do the bolded section would mean then Bk that you've done exactly what you initially started arguing against, created a tank that works "all the time", having little or NO chance to fail, because thats what you're describing here.
Knight
"Do you hear me you big lizard? You unhand that young man this instant!"
Knights are more than a social position, in fact many knights don't have any social standing at all. These knight errants uphold the values of honor, and make a name for themselves adventuring.
Playing a Knight: A Knight has the potential to dish out tremendous damage to a single opponent, and it is tempting to think of them as monster killers. However, it is best to realize in advance that the Knight does not often realize their tremendous damage output. The threat of the Knight's Designate Opponent ability is just that – a threat. A Knight excels at defensive tasks, and attacking a Knight is often one of the least effective options an opponent might exercise.
So by making it be a logical combat action for your opponents to attack your party's defensive expert, you've really contributed a lot to the party. A Knight can take a lot of the heat off the rest of the party. So don't get frustrated if enemies constantly interrupt your Designate Opponent action – that's the whole point. A Knight's role is to protect others, and the best way you can do that is to provide a legitimate threat to your opponents.
Alignment: Many Knights are Lawful. But not all of them. You have to maintain your code of conduct, but plenty of Chaotic creatures can do that too.
Races: Knights require a fairly social background to receive their training. After all, a solitary creature generally has little use for honor. As such, while Knights often spend tremendous amounts of time far from civilization, they are almost exclusively recruited from the ranks of races that are highly urban in nature.
Starting Gold: 6d6x10 gp (210 gold)
Starting Age: As Fighter.
Hit Die: d12
Class Skills: The Knight's class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), Knowledge (History, Nobility, and Geography) (Int), Listen (Wis), Perform (Cha), Ride (Dex), Sense Motive (Wis), Spot (Wis), and Swim (Str).
Skills/Level: 4 + Intelligence Bonus
BAB: Good (1/1), Saves: Fort: Poor; Reflex: Poor; Will: Good
Level, Benefit
1 Designate Opponent, Mounted Combat, Code of Conduct
2 Damage Reduction
3 Energy Resistance, Speak to Animals
4 Immunity to Fear, Knightly Spirit
5 Command
6 Defend Others, Quick Recovery
7 Bastion of Defense, Draw Fire
8 Mettle, Spell Shield
9 Sacrifice
10 Knightly Order
All of the following are Class Features of the Knight class:
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Knights are proficient with all simple weapons and Martial Weapons. Knights are proficient with Light, Medium, and Heavy Armor, Shields and Great Shields.
Designate Opponent (Ex): As a Swift Action, a Knight may mark an opponent as their primary foe. This foe must be within medium range and be able to hear the Knight's challenge. If the target creature inflicts ay damage on the Knight before the Knight's next turn, the attempt fails. Otherwise, any attacks the Knight uses against the opponent during her next turn inflict an extra d6 of damage for each Knight level. This effect ends at the end of her next turn, or when she has struck her opponent a number of times equal to the number of attacks normally allotted her by her Base Attack Bonus.Example: Vayn is a 6th level Knight presently benefiting from a haste spell, granting her an extra attack during a Full Attack action. On her turn she designates an Ettin as her primary opponent, and the Ettin declines to attack her during the ensuing turn. When her next turn comes up, she uses a Full Attack and attacks 3 times. The first two hits inflict an extra 6d6 of damage, and then she designates the Ettin as her opponent again. It won't soon ignore her![/list]
Mounted Combat: A Knight gains Mounted Combat as a bonus feat at 1st level. If she already has Mounted Combat, she may gain any Combat feat she meets the prerequisites for instead.
Code of Conduct: A Knight must fight with honor even when her opponents do not. Indeed, a Knight subscribes to honor to a degree far more than that which is strictly considered necessary by other honorable characters. Actions which even hint at the appearance of impropriety are anathema to the Knight:A Knight who fails to abide by her code of conduct loses the ability to use any of her Knightly abilities which require actions until she atones.
- A Knight must not accept undo assistance from allies even in combat. A Knight must refuse bonuses from Aid Another actions.
- A Knight must refrain from the use poisons of any kind, even normally acceptable poisons such as blade toxins.
- A Knight may not voluntarily change shape, whether she is impersonating a specific creature or not.
- A Knight may not sell Magic Items.
Damage Reduction (Ex): A Knight trains to suffer the unbearable with chivalry and grace. At 2nd level, she gains Damage Reduction of X/-, where X is half her Knight level, rounded down.
Energy Resistance (Ex): A Knight may protect herself from energy types that she expects. As a Swift Action, a 3rd level Knight may grant herself Energy Resistance against any energy type she chooses equal to her Knight Level plus her Shield Bonus. This energy resistance lasts until she spends a Swift Action to choose another Energy type or her Shield bonus is reduced.
Speak to Animals (Ex): A Knight can make herself understood by beasts. Her steed always seems to be able to catch the thrust of anything she says. A 3rd level Knight gains a bonus to any of her Ride and Handle Animal checks equal to half her Knight Level. In addition, there is no limit to how many tricks she can teach a creature, and her Handle Animal checks are not penalized for attempting to get a creature to perform a trick it does not know.
Immunity to Fear (Ex): At 4th level, a Knight becomes immune to [Fear] effects.
Knightly Spirit (Ex): As a Move Equivalent Action, a 4th level Knight may restore any amount of attribute damage or drain that she has suffered.
Command: A Knight gains Command as a bonus feat at level 5.
Defend Others (Ex): A 6th level Knight may use her own body to defend others. Any ally adjacent to the Knight gains Evasion, though she does not.
Quick Recovery (Ex): If a 6th level Knight is stunned or dazed during her turn, that condition ends at the end of that turn.Example: Vayn is hit by a mindblast and would be stunned for 7 turns. She misses her next action and then shakes off the condition ready to fight.[/list]
Bastion of Defense (Ex): A 7th level Knight can defend others with great facility. All adjacent allies except the Knight gain a +2 Dodge bonus to their Armor Class and Reflex Saves.
Draw Fire (Ex): A 7th level Knight can exploit the weaknesses of unintelligent opponents. With a Swift Action, she may pique the interest of any mindless opponent within medium range. That creature must make a Willpower Save (DC 10 + ½ Hit Dice + Constitution Modifier) or spend all of its actions moving towards or attacking the Knight. This effect ends after a number of rounds equal to the Knight's class level.
Mettle (Ex): An 8th level Knight who succeeds at a Fortitude Partial or Willpower Partial save takes no effect as if she had immunity.For example, if Vayn was hit with an inflict wounds spell and made her saving throw, she would take no damage instead of the partial effect in the spell description (half damage in this case).[/list]
Spell Shield (Ex): An 8th level Knight gains Spell Resistance of 5 + her character level. This Spell Resistance is increased by her shield bonus to AC if she has one.
Sacrifice (Ex): As an immediate action, a 9th level Knight may make herself the target of an attack or targeted effect that targets any creature within her reach.
Knightly Order: What is a powerful Knight without a descriptive adjective? Upon reaching 10th level, a Knight must join or found a Knightly order. From this point on, she may ignore one of the prerequisites for joining a Knightly Order prestige class. In addition, becoming a member of an order has special meaning for a 10th level Knight, and she gains an ability related to the order she joins. Some sample orders are listed below:
- Angelic Knight The Angelic Knights are a transformational order that attempts to live by the precepts of the upper planes. An Angelic Knight gains wings that allow her to fly at double her normal speed with perfect maneuverability. Also an Angelic Knight benefits from protection from evil at all times.
- Bane Knight The Bane Knights stand for running around burning the countryside with extreme burning. Bane Knights are immune to fire and do not have to breathe. In addition, a Bane Knight may set any unattended object on fire with a Swift Action at up to Medium Range.
- Chaos Knight Chaos Knights stand for madness and Giant Frog. With the powers of Giant Frog, they can Giant Frog. Also their natural armor bonus increases by +5 and they are immune to sleep effects.
- Dragon Knight Dedicated to the Platinum Dragon, the Dragon Knights serve love and justice in equal measure as dishes to those who need them. A Dragon Knight gains a +5 bonus to Sense Motive and any armor she wears has its enhancement bonus increased to +5 (it also gains a platinum sheen in the process, and as a side effect a Dragon Knight is never dirty for more than a few seconds).
- Elemental Knight The Elemental Knights may be dedicated to a particular element, or somehow dedicated to all of them. An Elemental Knight can planeshift at will to any Inner plane or the Prime Material plane. Also, she is immune to stunning and always benefits from attune form when on any Inner Plane.
- Fey Knight Using the powers of the Sprites, the Fey Knight has many fairy strengths. Firstly, she gains DR 10/Iron. Also, any of her attacks may do non-lethal damage at any time if this is desired. Also she never ages and does not need to drink.
- Great Knight Clad in opulent armor, the Great Knight cares only for her own power. The Great Knight gains a +4 bonus on Disarm or Sunder tests, and gains a +4 Profane bonus to her Strength.
- Hell Knight Forged in the sulphurous clouds of Baator, the Hell Knight is bathed in an evil radiance. In addition to being granted a ceremonial weapon made of green steel, a Hell Knight gains the coveted see in darkness ability of the Baatorians. Also, she has an inherent ability to know what every creature within 60' of finds most repugnant.
- Imperial Knight The great Empire needs champions able to unswervingly support its interests, and the Imperial Knight is one of the best. She may impose a zone of truth at will as a Supernatural ability, and all of her attacks are Lawfully aligned. Also, she continuously benefits from magic circle against Chaos.
The best tank I'd faced was a Psionic Gish PC with hilarious reach (30" or more), Stand Still, the Mage Slayer line of feats, and a REALLY powerful defence and offence. The guy could shut down an equal level PARTY all alone - and we were all optimized, heavily.It shows once again, that reach is pretty much the key to make a Tank useful. You stick the enemies to stay around yourself, so they can either hit you or get huge hits by your weapon while walking away/casting (or better: you have standstill and they can't get away).
a) it's only source of credible damage is purely reactionaryOkay well, to be fair it would access to tome feats and as much as I hate to say it items. Blitz which add's damage = to your base attack bonus is pretty vaild along with murderous intent and combat school. You can rack up some healthy damage even without knights challenge.
b) it's only great at protecting party members within its reach (which won't be very many).
Pardon me but, I included OBVIOUS flaws for said "Tank concept." 2.5 of them being 1) Bad AC 2) Possibly terrible Will Save 2.5) Not having Displacement/Mirror Image/Fly up and running, i.e. being able to actually be attacked.[/spoiler]
Further, I think Midnight_V did summarize the relevant part of the Tome Knight class several posts up.Did I? I dont' remember mentioning it before...
Which is to say, I don't think you need to work so hard to proselytize.It was meant to be funny, unbeliever, that is all.
On occasion I've even considered playing a Tome Knight. The Tome material overall makes me leery, though, as it comes from very different assumptions about the game than I and my gaming groups make. And, I worry about importing just parts of it.Well thats kind of a big part of the problem people look at it and get leery and some of that is the way it written but its foolish to be afraid to import PARTS of it. Also, not turning into the tome thread but SOME of those diffrent from you and your gaming group, are likely correct, no offense. No group has all the answers. Not even the people who make the game.
Also, will approximately 30 damage really make the difference?It affects every attack you make. So if you hit with both your attacks etc its more like 60 damage a round more if you use the tome feats. However, note that one of the more important assumptions is that the bab bonus scales better so you don't attack at 20/15/10/5.
really going to deter that Pit Fiend from laying into the Mage?maybe, maybe not, but giving it enough damage to do so, would offend some people. Bkdubs speaks above about Nuclear Deterent tanking and how thats not his vision of the tank, so it has a small line to work on for damage before people start complaining. Also, thtas 60 bonus damage per attack, in addition to whatever damage a 20 level Knight would otherwise be doing[/spoiler]
I don't think the Knight is the answer since it's homebrew.
The Knight from PHB2 is not, but what does that class miss that Frank's & Keith's Knight has?Apparently unbeliever was mistaken, I didn't think everyone had seen it. I posted it so you could see, people who hadn't had a chancet to look. The phb 2 knight doesn't really do very much at all. Here's the link to the web preview. The Official Knight (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060501a&page=2)
I think a real Tank needs lots of immunities (so he doesn't get useless in combat by panicking, getting stunned, getting dazed, dying by getting critted etc.) and a Tank needs some things the barbarian already gives: improved movement speed and high HP. Add some sort of healing (I'm NOT talking about Fast Healing 5 at lvl12, I mean things like Wrathful Healing) and resistances (DR, resistance or immunity to elements etc.) and you got someone who doesn't die. But he also needs more: Wings to fly (pretty easy by grafts) and sometimes/day short-ranged-teleportation.Okay. This implies to me that you didn't read the class that I posted at all.
Same as above statment, and Unbeleiver was stating that its just not enough bonus damage but it really probbably is.
It was said a lot in this thread a Tank needs to hit hard, but I think that should not mean you instant-kill an enemy, Pounce to the next one and repeat... You just need to get an enemy down within some hits (maybe 2 for casters and 8 for HP-based monsters).
The best tank I'd faced was a Psionic Gish PC with hilarious reach (30" or more), Stand Still, the Mage Slayer line of feats, and a REALLY powerful defence and offence. The guy could shut down an equal level PARTY all alone - and we were all optimized, heavily.Practical Tanking with existing material dictates that the "sticky knight" is one of the ways to go. "Sticky Gish" works just as well or better. I would use either a wu-jen, or a cleric for this purpose. LIkely a cleric with the glory domain, someone did it with a build call facored soulzilla but really I'm just getting giantsize the spell, onto a build an using the same tactics as any other tank. I also like the caster tank for its ability to set up fields of darkness or walls or arbitrarium to protect his party from line of sight on a whim. You and I talking about practical tanking is ALMOST a min/max issue though. . . [/spoiler]
It shows once again, that reach is pretty much the key to make a Tank useful. You stick the enemies to stay around yourself, so they can either hit you or get huge hits by your weapon while walking away/casting (or better: you have standstill and they can't get away).
It helps if you can survive a salvo at least. When Designated Melee dies to full attacks(well ok, everything dies to full attacks that connect), it means meleeing is buggered out of the gate to begin with.A tank needs to be able to take some hits, but you're working off of the assumption that the enemies not being able to attack the tank's allies automatically means that they can target the tank. This isn't necessarily true. Some of the best ways to stop them from attacking allies leaves them unable to attack anyone, including the tank.Notice that the three things I set out above do not mean "heavily armored guys that takes hits for the party". They mean "guy that can stop the enemies from hitting the party and not be stopped from this task". Being hit is not a part of being a tank. Stopping your allies from being hit is.It does however, help if your tank can take hits, because if hes stopping enemies from hitting everyone else they're going to hitting him, and most 'tanks' can't even take one salvo.