Brilliant Gameologists Forum
The Thinktank => Homebrew & House Rules => : Elennsar October 30, 2008, 11:06:20 AM
-
Some partially organized thoughts:
4+Int Skill points, add Fighter class skills to list instead of as DMG.
Requirements (feats): Armor Proficiency (heavy), Diehard, Endurance, Formation Expert. This replaces the requirements in the DMG.
1) A Dwarven defender may move up to his base movement each round while in a Defensive Stance. He does not gain a bonus to Strength, and must fight defensively (or use Combat Expertise) or use Total Defense while in his Defensive Stance. Otherwise, this ability works as written.
2) Dwarven Defenders recieve a bonus to saves versus fear equal to their Defender level.
3) A Dwarven Defender may, at 3rd level and above, add the higher of his Constitution or Wisdom modifier to Will saves.
4) A Dwarven Defender may act normally when disabled. This ability applies from 1st level on.
5) A Dwarven defender recieves a bonus to AC equal to the higher of +2 when using Lock Shields, not +1. This applies from 1st level on.
6) At 8th level on, a Dwarven defender who becomes exhausted is instead merely fatigued, and fatigue has no effect. This also eliminates the winded state after using a Defensive Stance.
Constructive comments and suggestions welcome. This write up is written on the assumption that wizards and other spellcasters are toned down in power, and is intended to be at tier 3 (to use JaronK's tier scale), though it will probably additional features to keep up offensively, as the class (even without the adjustment to Defensive Stance) lacks bite. I am unsure of how high a bonus to give it, however, as my experience in play does not include mid-high teen levels.
-
It's certainly an improvement. I'll have to take more time to look at it more closely later.
I was reading through the Deepstone Sentinal from ToB this weekend and was wondering if that was intended to be a DD fix. Still, many stone dragon stances require you to either stand still, or move no more than five feet per round (I don't remember which). I've always felt the requirement to stand still was the class' biggest weakness.
I'm glad to see you loosened that requirement.
-
Yeah. My thoughts are that Dwarven Defenders don't rely on mobility, unlike say, swashbucklers, but they're not static.
I don't want them to be fully mobile...the whole point of DS is that they're focused on holding their ground, wherever that is, but I do want them able to move about if necessary.
Appreciate the interest in giving it a more through look when time permits, instead of just glancing and forgetting.
-
Some partially organized thoughts:
4+Int Skill points, add Fighter class skills to list instead of as DMG.
Requirements (feats): Armor Proficiency (heavy), Diehard, Endurance, Formation Expert. This replaces the requirements in the DMG.
Ditch Diehard and Endurance. Raise BAB requirements to +9 or +10 in place of them. Those feats are weak and worthless past 3rd level at most, seeing as Shape Soulmeld (Rage Claws) does the same damn thing as Diehard without gimping you for actions while in the negatives.
1) A Dwarven defender may move up to his base movement each round while in a Defensive Stance. He does not gain a bonus to Strength, and must fight defensively (or use Combat Expertise) or use Total Defense while in his Defensive Stance. Otherwise, this ability works as written.
NERFED! THis makes it worse, as the Str bonus is no better than Rage and Total Defense means you can't attack (or take AoOs, which every Fighter should be doing). The movement increase is nice, but was really the only change needed.
2) Dwarven Defenders recieve a bonus to saves versus fear equal to their Defender level.
Nice boon. Situational, but nice.
3) A Dwarven Defender may, at 3rd level and above, add the higher of his Constitution or Wisdom modifier to Will saves.
Replace "or" with "instead". Not that both stats to one save is overpowered, but some people have Negative Wisdom mods, and this reduces MAD for them.
4) A Dwarven Defender may act normally when disabled. This ability applies from 1st level on.
As I said, remove Diehard. Replace this ability with the effect of Rage Claws, and have it scale with level to give them an effective +50% to their HP.
5) A Dwarven defender recieves a bonus to AC equal to the higher of +2 when using Lock Shields, not +1. This applies from 1st level on.
Not going to be used by anyone who knows what they are doing, as shields suck hard. Have them get a bonus to AC equal to 1/2 their class level if they are using a shield, and make it a Competence bonus.
6) At 8th level on, a Dwarven defender who becomes exhausted is instead merely fatigued, and fatigue has no effect. This also eliminates the winded state after using a Defensive Stance.
Meh. May want to improve the DR they gain to 5/-, as that is tempting as all hell.
Constructive comments and suggestions welcome. This write up is written on the assumption that wizards and other spellcasters are toned down in power, and is intended to be at tier 3 (to use JaronK's tier scale), though it will probably additional features to keep up offensively, as the class (even without the adjustment to Defensive Stance) lacks bite. I am unsure of how high a bonus to give it, however, as my experience in play does not include mid-high teen levels.
Scale the Defensive Stance to be equal to Rage. Thus they get +4 at 1st, +6 at 5th, and +8 at 10th. Add in more uses/day (or make it /encounter).
Defense sucks in DnD, especially when you have to gimp your offense just to avoid the casual AoOs from CR-appropriate enemies. Compare the average AC of a 20th level character to the Full Attack of a CR 20 enemy, and you will see what I mean. The highest reasonably possible AC at 20th is in the low 100s, but that type of character can't take to the offensive worth a damn. Mages have some trouble with AC no matter how much they focus on it, which is why they prefer using miss chance and contengency plans over high AC.
This was one of the crippling factors behin the DD. AC is not something a PC should focus on, seeing as Concealment does the same damn thing while being effective at all levels. An AC of 20 at 1st level is about the same as Concealment 45% at 20th level. Concealment also prevents Sneak Attacks and has a chance of negating a Crit outright. Because of this, the DD is now viewed as underpowered and a horrible choice for a build.
-
Ditch Diehard and Endurance. Raise BAB requirements to +9 or +10 in place of them. Those feats are weak and worthless past 3rd level at most, seeing as Shape Soulmeld (Rage Claws) does the same damn thing as Diehard without gimping you for actions while in the negatives.
Something that needs to be worked on in regards to the feats, however, not the class. I don't know the details of what Shape Soulmeld does, so please tell if you think it should be used.
Personally, I'm not sure what to do with the BAB requirement, because while I don't think it is necessarily wrong, I don't get why it is needed. For the moment, dropping it to +5.
NERFED! THis makes it worse, as the Str bonus is no better than Rage and Total Defense means you can't attack (or take AoOs, which every Fighter should be doing). The movement increase is nice, but was really the only change needed.
I've never understood why Total Defense and "no AoO" have anything to do with each other. At least here (Dwarven Defenders), that should be dropped. As for the Strength bonus being dropped: This is intentional. This is the "Immovable object." aspect of the class, which means it should not be hard hitting. Do agree it needs something to make up for that, however.
Nice boon. Situational, but nice.
Figured they deserve it.
Replace "or" with "instead". Not that both stats to one save is overpowered, but some people have Negative Wisdom mods, and this reduces MAD for them.
Yeah, bad wording by me. I meant "whichever is better". "Both" wouldn't be a bad feature as an option (as in, "may add both his Constitution and his Wisdom modifiers, if positive."), either.
Scale the Defensive Stance to be equal to Rage. Thus they get +4 at 1st, +6 at 5th, and +8 at 10th. Add in more uses/day (or make it /encounter).
Defense sucks in DnD, especially when you have to gimp your offense just to avoid the casual AoOs from CR-appropriate enemies. Compare the average AC of a 20th level character to the Full Attack of a CR 20 enemy, and you will see what I mean. The highest reasonably possible AC at 20th is in the low 100s, but that type of character can't take to the offensive worth a damn. Mages have some trouble with AC no matter how much they focus on it, which is why they prefer using miss chance and contengency plans over high AC.
This was one of the crippling factors behin the DD. AC is not something a PC should focus on, seeing as Concealment does the same damn thing while being effective at all levels. An AC of 20 at 1st level is about the same as Concealment 45% at 20th level. Concealment also prevents Sneak Attacks and has a chance of negating a Crit outright. Because of this, the DD is now viewed as underpowered and a horrible choice for a build.
That is something I want to see worked on. As for scaling Defensive Stance: I don't want to make it too good. One of the things that I think should be the goal is to keep the Defender a "in some circumstances" class. In its chosen environment, it should pwn. Outside of that, it merely needs to be able to keep up.
But yes, as written, it is a wimpy prestige class, which is a shame, since it is one of the few truly "generic" concepts in the game.
So, I'd like to add some offensive bite (but not tied to Defensive Stance), make it have an AC actually worth having without having to invest excessive amonuts of resources, and generally make sure that it can take care of itself even if not DSing.
Also, it would probably not be a bad idea to get some "Stupid wizard. Your magic has no effect on ME!" abilities, but I'd rather not bolt those on without getting the core of it as "defensive fighter" taken care of. If it can't do that, its not worth having.
-
Have it require Shield Specialization and Active Shield Defense. ASD allows the player to take AoOs even when using the Total Defense action, and at no penalty when Fighting Defensively.
From there you could give it something similar to a Crusader's Furious Counterstrike except maybe to have it charge up when a Dwarven Defender's allies are attacked/dealt damage.
Not sure what to do with Defensive Stance since it SUCKS. You could give it bonuses to AC, and DR, and Spell Resistance, and Saves... etc, whatever, all that great defensive stuff, but then you should also make it difficult to ignore the Dwarven Defender while he's in the stance. The whole point is to defend other people with your big tough Dwarf body.
Ramp the HD to d12 if it isn't already. You could give the Dwarven Defender temporary hit points while in the stance, and even Fast Healing. Staying mobile is definitely part of the way toward the enemies having a hard time ignoring the Defender, but he needs something more.
I keep thinking of Bulwark of Defense (the Knight ability) which makes all squares you threaten difficult terrain, which is nice, but still not 100% there yet.
My only remaining thought, which is very Dwarven, but also very supernatural, is to give them some kind of ability to strike the ground and create seismic effects to produce walls of stone. As I said, very supernatural, but very effective as well.
-
ASD only applies to shield using Defenders. Otherwise I like.
I like the Furious Counterstrike idea, as it means that messing with a group of Dwarven Defenders is a VERY bad idea...which is a good thing, in my opinion.
It already has a d12.
Bulwark of Defense, yes, good idea.
One thing I'd like to do is find a way to make it so that if you try and slip by a Dwarven Defender, he gets to whap you with an AOO. Unfortunately, few Dwarven Defenders will get the AOOs to use that.
Something to be adjusted, but I'm not sure how.
-
Something that needs to be worked on in regards to the feats, however, not the class. I don't know the details of what Shape Soulmeld does, so please tell if you think it should be used.
Personally, I'm not sure what to do with the BAB requirement, because while I don't think it is necessarily wrong, I don't get why it is needed. For the moment, dropping it to +5.
Shape Soulmeld would be the better one to use, but it is so out of flavor with the class that you would be better off making a variant for Incarnum entirely rather than making it a requirement.
Lowering the BAB requirement is nice. Makes the class better for multiclassers in general.
I've never understood why Total Defense and "no AoO" have anything to do with each other. At least here (Dwarven Defenders), that should be dropped. As for the Strength bonus being dropped: This is intentional. This is the "Immovable object." aspect of the class, which means it should not be hard hitting. Do agree it needs something to make up for that, however.
Total Defense implies that you are using your weapon, armor, and shield (if any) to actively block their attacks. This prevents you from taking AoOs as you are not in the right position to swing your weapon. The Str bonus being dropped outright hurts the PrC, as it was one of the few bonuses this side of the alignment spectrum that mimics Rage (which make the class very tempting).
You may need to grant them some kind of immunity to forced movement, as Bull Rushing them after they have moved their base land speed can force them out of their stance easily. That was one reason the Str bonus was there, to help bolster them against Bull Rushing.
Yeah, bad wording by me. I meant "whichever is better". "Both" wouldn't be a bad feature as an option (as in, "may add both his Constitution and his Wisdom modifiers, if positive."), either.
Paladin 7/DD X with the PH 2 feat makes this even nicer, as that's Con twice and Cha once to Will saves. Adding in Wisdom would just make them beg for Mettle.
That is something I want to see worked on. As for scaling Defensive Stance: I don't want to make it too good. One of the things that I think should be the goal is to keep the Defender a "in some circumstances" class. In its chosen environment, it should pwn. Outside of that, it merely needs to be able to keep up.
The problem is that this class is easily rendered into a Fish out of Water situation. And, as a rule of thuumb, most PrCs for melee characters can't be "too good" at what they do. A Cleric who focuses on combat as much as possible will easily be more powerful that most Melee PrCs out there (though damage-wise it won't be equal to a Charger build, it will still be a big enough threat to the enemy that they have to deal with him somehow).
But yes, as written, it is a wimpy prestige class, which is a shame, since it is one of the few truly "generic" concepts in the game.
That's something I usually dislike about PrCs. PrCs are supposed to be more focused than base classes, and classes like EK, MT, and even the DD are just too generic IMO. Compare the focus of the Abjurant Champion to the focus of the EK, and you will see a major difference. Then compare MT to it's Druid/Wizard counterpart (which actually gets class features!). That's one of the reasons I haven't ported over my .Hack classes from Gleemax, as they just feel too generic.
So, I'd like to add some offensive bite (but not tied to Defensive Stance), make it have an AC actually worth having without having to invest excessive amonuts of resources, and generally make sure that it can take care of itself even if not DSing.
That's more of a problem with the combat system itself, seeing as Concealment is more valuable and more benefical than AC. Someone with 100% concealment is nigh untouchable in combat, but even someone with 1000 AC can be hit by a commoner 5% of the time. That 5% chance is a major gap in the defense that would be AC, and renders a serious problem.
Also, it would probably not be a bad idea to get some "Stupid wizard. Your magic has no effect on ME!" abilities, but I'd rather not bolt those on without getting the core of it as "defensive fighter" taken care of. If it can't do that, its not worth having.
Mettle would be a nice addition to the PrC. They get Good Will saves, and most full BAB classes have the good Fort saves covered anyway. So they effectively have two good saves if you go Paladin 10/DD 10. That screams for Mettle.
-
Total Defense implies that you are using your weapon, armor, and shield (if any) to actively block their attacks. This prevents you from taking AoOs as you are not in the right position to swing your weapon. The Str bonus being dropped outright hurts the PrC, as it was one of the few bonuses this side of the alignment spectrum that mimics Rage (which make the class very tempting).
You may need to grant them some kind of immunity to forced movement, as Bull Rushing them after they have moved their base land speed can force them out of their stance easily. That was one reason the Str bonus was there, to help bolster them against Bull Rushing.
Its still a bad idea, even if it can be justified. Being unable to take an AOO is too limiting. As for forced movement...agreed. I've been weighing a "can stand still and be immune", but that wouldn't be enough.
As for the Strength bonus: Again, in favor of them getting bite, but not in tying it to DS.
Paladin 7/DD X with the PH 2 feat makes this even nicer, as that's Con twice and Cha once to Will saves. Adding in Wisdom would just make them beg for Mettle.
I really wouldn't argue against granting them it. It does fit.
That's something I usually dislike about PrCs. PrCs are supposed to be more focused than base classes, and classes like EK, MT, and even the DD are just too generic IMO. Compare the focus of the Abjurant Champion to the focus of the EK, and you will see a major difference. Then compare MT to it's Druid/Wizard counterpart (which actually gets class features!). That's one of the reasons I haven't ported over my .Hack classes from Gleemax, as they just feel too generic.
Yeah. Generic=bland=weak=bad design. But without having a more specific class set up in general, I'm not sure how to fix that for prestiges.
That's more of a problem with the combat system itself, seeing as Concealment is more valuable and more benefical than AC. Someone with 100% concealment is nigh untouchable in combat, but even someone with 1000 AC can be hit by a commoner 5% of the time. That 5% chance is a major gap in the defense that would be AC, and renders a serious problem.
Not arguing. But the Dwarven Defender is supposed to be one of the High AC guys, so he needs to actually be there. Fixing the combat system is another step.
Mettle would be a nice addition to the PrC. They get Good Will saves, and most full BAB classes have the good Fort saves covered anyway. So they effectively have two good saves if you go Paladin 10/DD 10. That screams for Mettle.
Given my druthers, I'd give Paladins Good Will and Mettle. So really feeling pretty confident on Defenders deserving it.
I've a question. As stated, I don't want to tie "we can fuck you up bad" to Defensive Stance. How big a bonus do they need to compete?
As stated, my experience with mid-high teen levels in play is minimal to the ponit of almost literally nonexistant.
Just while musing: Do they need Trap Sense? I'd like to replace it with something more fitting, because I've never understood the logic behind that ability. At least for "Trap finders", it makes sense. But as a general bonus, it seems to be a half assed compensation for "you suck" classes.
-
1) nice, the mobility thing is important, seeing as you either need to have some way to make enemies attack you over others(like 4e defenders do it), a ranged attack, or being able to get to your enemy. How adding 'Cannot charge'? Your current version seems to allow for charging while in a defensive stance, is that unintentional?
2)mkay, nothing really interesting there, I'd have put this as a bonus vs trip/bull rush personally, fits the defender better than saves vs fear(which besides, 3) takes care of that), and lets him hold his ground on those even against several size categories difference.
3)nice
4)Interesting, I presume you still take damage from acting in this state? or not?
5)interesting too, but the number of things this class will be getting at first level would appear to be getting top heavy.
6) I presume you need to state that this replaces Mobile Defense, since that ability is useless now(you can move a lot more than 5ft already).
Should Defensive Stance upgrade though? The existing save bonus is resistance, which overlaps with the most common save bonus, so all you'd be getting out of this is +4 dodge AC, +4 Con. While the dodge bonus is indeed pretty cool, does anyone thing it needs some zing to it?
Currently it's just a defensive raging, and unlike a Rage, Con bonuses that wear off aren't anywhere as awesome as Str bonuses that wear off. Some way to keep people in melee in melee would also be nice, possibly a 'stop movement' AoO ability?
Qualification wise, Endurance isn't particularly a good pick either.
-
Its still a bad idea, even if it can be justified. Being unable to take an AOO is too limiting. As for forced movement...agreed. I've been weighing a "can stand still and be immune", but that wouldn't be enough.
As for the Strength bonus: Again, in favor of them getting bite, but not in tying it to DS.
Then cut the bonus in half or double the Con bonus, to show that they are more defensive than offensive.
I really wouldn't argue against granting them it. It does fit. Still, something to be kept in mind so they don't get too good.
No such thing as "Too good in melee". At least, not when you are playing anything not presented to you from TO.
Yeah. Generic=bland=weak=bad design. But without having a more specific class set up in general, I'm not sure how to fix that for prestiges.
That's my job. I completely revamped the flavor of the Hexblade with one fix. When I get my hands around to working, I can take Club Soda and give it more flavors than Baskin Robins has ice cream. Extra crunchy toppings, at that.
Not arguing. But the Dwarven Defender is supposed to be one of the High AC guys, so he needs to actually be there.
Right.
Given my druthers, I'd give Paladins Good Will and Mettle. So really feeling pretty confident on Defenders deserving it.
I've a question. As stated, I don't want to tie "we can fuck you up bad" to Defensive Stance. How big a bonus do they need to compete?
As stated, my experience with mid-high teen levels in play is minimal to the ponit of almost literally nonexistant.
At 20th level, your average Str for a melee character is in the 30s. Chargers have it in the 50s, without templates. Druids have it however high they can afford. This class would be in love with itself if the Con bonus at 10th was +12, and the Str bonus +6 or +8. That would give them the highest HP at ECL 20 without resorting to templates, and the DR 5/- just makes them even more of a tank. With the right feats, they would be very difficult to deal with.
IIRC, DS is a Free action to activate. Leave that be, or if I am wrong, change it to Free. Or Swift. Or Immediate (nasty surprise!).
-
1) Yeah, its not intentional. I don't mind them charging and being effective, but DS is meant to be the "we hold here." power.
2) Yeah, they're getting one, I just think that 'effectively fearless" fits too.
4) I'm in favor of "Not." But as written at moment, you do.
5) That is a bit of a problem.
6) Right.
7) I do think it needs some zing. As for "stop movement"...yeah, I'm not sure what. Zillions of feats and I'm not sure which ones fit. I'm not sure how much "umph' it needs to be a good melee class.
8 ) No, but it does fit. The feat does suck as written, but I don't want to drop it just because WotC can't make it useful.
Dodge and Toughness as requirements are just being cruel, however.
Not commited to Endurance as a requirement, however. Just thinking it fits to be "tireless"
Then cut the bonus in half or double the Con bonus, to show that they are more defensive than offensive.
Let me rephrase: I'd like to give them a "We can hurt people really badly. Don't even try messing with us." seperate from their "we are immovable objects in your way."
No such thing as "Too good in melee". At least, not when you are playing anything not presented to you from TO.
Unfortunately true, it seems.
That's my job. I completely revamped the flavor of the Hexblade with one fix. When I get my hands around to working, I can take Club Soda and give it more flavors than Baskin Robins has ice cream. Extra crunchy toppings, at that.
Then I'd like to know what to do to give it something interesting. Not just more useful, but a little cooler.
IIRC, DS is a Free action to activate. Leave that be, or if I am wrong, change it to Free. Or Swift. Or Immediate (nasty surprise!).
"Using the defensive stance takes no time itself, but a defender can only do so during his action."
Immediate or Swift action sounds good by me. Running into a Dwarven Defender is supposed to be an unpleasant and exceedingly painful surprise.
Anything that makes them "always ready" to make that true is a good something.
-
Why not have them get Diehard as a bonus feat without needing the Endurance requirement? Then you can have it improve with levels as a seperate class feature. Gradually work your way from normal Diehard to 4E negatives for HP+Improved Diehard (not an actual feat, but I can work out the wording easily).
Then I'd like to know what to do to give it something interesting. Not just more useful, but a little cooler.
Reflavoring the class takes a lot of time, and it usually happens when I sit down and take a few days to work on it. I'd help you as much as I can on this, but it would take weeks for me to change up even one class.
-
Can't argue with that. Hell, give them Diehard as a bonus feat and Endurance.
Should they take damage while acting under the influence of (Improved) Diehard?
As for reflavoring: No pressure. But if you do have something you think would make it actually worth a damn, by all means tell me.
No point having a thread on changing the class if people are refusing to share ideas on it. : )
Thanks for your help so far.
-
Can't argue with that. Hell, give them Diehard as a bonus feat and Endurance.
Should they take damage while acting under the influence of (Improved) Diehard?
As for reflavoring: No pressure. But if you do have something you think would make it actually worth a damn, by all means tell me.
No point having a thread on changing the class if people are refusing to share ideas on it. : )
Thanks for your help so far.
Try and find a copy of the MoI. They have the Rage Claws soulmeld, which does what Diehard should have done.
-
My version of Diehard:
Diehard
Prereqs: Base Fort Save +3 or higher, Con 15+
Benefit: You do not fall unconscious at 0 hitpoints. You can continue fighting while below 0 hitpoints as if you had 1 hitpoint. You do not die at -10 hitpoints, but rather when your negative hitpoints equal 1/4 your maximum hitpoints (or -10 if higher). Once per day you can reroll any save against a death, ability damage/drain, or negative level effect with a +2 bonus to the roll.
-
Try and find a copy of the MoI. They have the Rage Claws soulmeld, which does what Diehard should have done.
That's Magic of Incarnum by the way. It's an interesting system.
What about something similar to Stand Still (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#standStill)? Maybe add the effects of that feat to every AoO?
-
Thanks, I'm terrible at deciphering abreviations.
Is there anyway to get it at a reasonable price? I'm serious here. I don't expect I'll use it enough to want to spend $40 or something.
And Stand Still sounds very fitting. Defenders still don't get enough attacks of opportunity, but maybe that's a game system problem.
No sign that its a Psionic Only feat, so wouldn't hurt to just give it as a bonus.
-
Well, a Diehard based off rageclaws eh, specifically for DDs?
Diehard
You can continue to fight without penalty if you are disabled or dying. When reduced to 0 hit points, you can act as if you weren’t disabled (that is, you ignore the normal restriction to only a single move or standard action per turn). You do not lose 1 hit point for performing a standard or otherwise strenuous action while at 0 hit points.
When reduced to negative hit points, you do not fall unconscious. You do not automatically lose 1 hit point each round when at negative hit points. When your current hit points drop below the lower of –9 or X per Dwarven Defender level, you immediately die.
Not sure what X should be, but giving the DD Stand Still is a nice start, and if AoO availability is an issue, well...give them bonus AoOs per round as if their DD level was their dex bonus for the purpose of combat reflexes?
-
And my version of the Dwarven Defender (using some of the ideas we've come up with):
Requirements: BAB +5, Shield Specialization, Active Shield Defense
HD: d12
BAB: Full
Saves: Good Fort and Will
Class Skills (4+Int per level): Balance, Climb, Concentration, Craft, Diplomacy, Heal, Intimidate, Jump, Knowledge (Dungeoneering, Religion), Listen, Profession, Ride, Sense Motive, Spot, Swim
1. Defensive Stance 1/enc, Defender's Fury (15)
2. Bulwark of Defense, Diehard 1/day
3. Defender's Fury (20)
4. May I Have Your Attention, Diehard 2/day
5. Defender's Fury (25)
6. Defensive Stance 2/enc, Diehard 3/day
7. Defender's Fury (30)
8. LOOK AT ME!, Diehard 4/day
9. Defender's Fury (35)
10. Diehard 5/day, Impossible to Kill
Defensive Stance - Once per encounter a Dwarven Defender can enter a Defensive Stance as a free action (and can enter it even on others' turns). During this stance the Defender gains a +2 bonus to AC, +4 if fighting defensively, and +6 if using the total defense action. Furthermore he gains a +4 bonus to Str, temporary hitpoints equal to his Con modifier times his HD, and SR 11+HD+Con modifier. While in this stance a Dwarven Defender can't move more than his base movement speed without ending the stance. This stance lasts 5 rounds.
At 6th level the bonuses to AC go to +4, +6, and +8 respectively, and the bonus to Str increases to +8. At 6th level a Dwarven Defender can enter this stance twice each encounter (allowing him to break out of the stance if necessary and be able to re-enter at a more advantageous position).
Defender's Fury - Whenever a Dwarven Defender's ally would be dealt damage add that amount of damage to a pool called his Fury pool. For every 10 points in his Fury pool he gains a +1 bonus to attack rolls, and for every 5 points in his pool he gains a +1 bonus to damage. This pool gradually depletes. At the end of any turn during which the Dwarven Defender got a bonus to attack or damage from this ability reduce the amount in the pool by 5. At the end of any turn during which none of his allies are dealt damage reduce the amount in the pool by 10. At 1st level a Dwarven Defender's Fury pool can only hold 15 points, but this increases by 5 at every odd level thereafter to a maximum of 35.
Bulwark of Defense - As Knight.
Diehard - Dwarven Defenders gain Diehard as a bonus feat (as mine). Dwarven Defenders gain additional re-rolls against the effects specified in the Diehard feat as the table indicates above.
May I Have Your Attention - Whenever a Dwarven Defender attacks with a melee attack, whether he hits or misses, the attacked creature must succeed on a Will save (10+1/2 character level+Dwarven Defender's Con modifier) or attack the Defender with a melee attack on its next turn (incapable of other actions). If the Defender's attack hits increase the save DC by 4.
LOOK AT ME! - As a standard action, once per encounter, a Dwarven Defender may unleash a battle cry subjecting all enemies that can see or hear him within 100ft to a Will save (10+1/2 character level+Defender's Con modifier). Any creature that fails its save must attack the Defender with a melee attack on it's next turn (or spend it's turn getting as close to the Defender as possible), and for the next 1d4 turns.
Impossible to Kill - As long as a Dwarven Defender is in Defensive Stance he cannot be killed by hitpoint damage. Whenever his negative hitpoint total would be low enough for him to die he can instead make a Fort or Will save (whichever he chooses, DC 15+1/2 his character level). If he succeeds he remains standing and able to fight until he next dealt damage. Increase the save DC of this save by +3 for each save he has previously succeeded against.
-
That might work.
How to adjust this and add in the feat so it is a little less front heavy?
Even with weak feats, getting a bunch of feats at 1st level is very tempting. And I do not want to deal with "I'll dip in." anymore than is unavoidable in a system that doesn't rule out dipping.
Prestige classes are meant to be at least a fairly serious part of your character's identity, so taking multiple levels should be well worth it.
Bkdubs123:
I would drop the Strength bonus for Defensive Stance. If it needs the bite, let's give it a bonus to clobber people in general, but going defensive shouldn't be necessary to get it.
-
I would make Defensive Stance just that. A stance.
Whenever X condition is fulfilled (dwarf makes no more than 1 move action each round) they get Y and Z bonuses.
Also needs counter attack capabilities similar to Robilar's Gambit, Protection from Arrows spell effect, and Spell Resistance (or boosted benefit from dwarf bonus to saves against spells), or else they'll just be a walking wall.. prime target for skirmishers, spellcasters, and archers.
-
Some partially organized thoughts:
4+Int Skill points, add Fighter class skills to list instead of as DMG.
Requirements (feats): Armor Proficiency (heavy), Diehard, Endurance, Formation Expert. This replaces the requirements in the DMG.
1) A Dwarven defender may move up to his base movement each round while in a Defensive Stance. He does not gain a bonus to Strength, and must fight defensively (or use Combat Expertise) or use Total Defense while in his Defensive Stance. Otherwise, this ability works as written.
2) Dwarven Defenders recieve a bonus to saves versus fear equal to their Defender level.
3) A Dwarven Defender may, at 3rd level and above, add the higher of his Constitution or Wisdom modifier to Will saves.
4) A Dwarven Defender may act normally when disabled. This ability applies from 1st level on.
5) A Dwarven defender recieves a bonus to AC equal to the higher of +2 when using Lock Shields, not +1. This applies from 1st level on.
6) At 8th level on, a Dwarven defender who becomes exhausted is instead merely fatigued, and fatigue has no effect. This also eliminates the winded state after using a Defensive Stance.
Constructive comments and suggestions welcome. This write up is written on the assumption that wizards and other spellcasters are toned down in power, and is intended to be at tier 3 (to use JaronK's tier scale), though it will probably additional features to keep up offensively, as the class (even without the adjustment to Defensive Stance) lacks bite. I am unsure of how high a bonus to give it, however, as my experience in play does not include mid-high teen levels.
Bonus vs. fear equal to level? Con to Will saves? Just make the class immune to fear and be done with it. Drop the crap feats--namely, Diehard/Endurance. Give the class those as bonus feats. Give the class bonus HP, too.
-
Immunity to fear is a tad strong, but its not necessarily a bad idea.
My reasoning for "bonus" (and this applies to the Con to Will as well)...a fair a number of DD will be entering the class as Fighters.
Fighters should be harder to scare and Dwarven fighters should wind up with tougher Will saves than average.
As for bonus hp: It already has (officially) a d12. Does it need more?
As for crap feats: I'd like to make both of those useful feats rather than dump them from the game, but that's a seperate process from the class. Still, leaning in favor of those suggesting it get Diehard as a bonus feat (at first level? When?)
-
No, it probably doesn't need more. But I like it having more. MOAR HP
-
Moar HP! MOAR HP!
MOARRRRRRRR
The class needs like d20s for HD.
-
:lmao
Okay. Seriously. Why does it need more than a d10?
No, I'm not against better, but does it need better?
Because frankly, I think it should have hit points equal to the its Constitution score times character level, myself. :P
That is, each level adds that many hit points. So at 1st level in DD, you gain 6 (or 8, depending on the BAB requirement) x Con score, 2nd level in DD is 7 (or 9) x Con score...
-
A relatively stationary class always needs moar HP.
Using CON score rather than any class bonus might work, but when you factor in CON boosting items it gets weird.
-
Um, for the idea that Dwarven Defenders should have a bonus to resist being tripped/bull rushed, two questions before I request a test by someone who feels they can build an efficient one.
1) How big a bonus?
2) When does it start? And is this a "bonus by being a Dwarven Defender at all" (possibly improved by being in DS), or "bonus only while in Defensive Stance"
-
Well, there's a 3rd level Stone Dragon stance that gives +10 to resist those things. Roots of the Mountain. So, I'd say it can probably start at +4 to resist, just by being a DD, increase to +6 by entering Defensive Stance, and then maybe increase to like... +8/+16? +10/+20? At the end of 10 levels.
-
Sounds good to me! Who feels like making a reasonably optimized but not flawless (Since that will give a false impression of how good it is) sample Defender for us to playtest?
-
What? With what class? I've seen lots of ideas bumped around here, but absolutely no finalized mechanics... ???
-
True. Um, give me a few minutes and I'll post a-unless-I-overlooked-something write up.
-
True. Um, give me a few minutes and I'll post a-unless-I-overlooked-something write up.
:lol
I'll give it a go after you're done.
-
Well, right now, we just have yours. I could piece something else together, but that seems the only one with "when it gets what" all lined up.
So let's try that.
Gah, way to go brain, overlook the fact we didn't have a prepared "this is what it looks like now".
So, let's see what we get. This isn't about balance in terms of dipping, just about if it can handle challenges of its CR if you pursue it all the way.
-
15th level or what?
-
Yeah, let's start there and work our way down. If it can handle 15th level, we know that maxing it out is worth the investment.
After that, start at 6th (level 1 in DD) and see how it goes, I think.
-
Okay, here we go:
http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheets/view.php?id=90573
He stays in Thicket of Blades basically all the time combining it's power with Bulwark of Defense and LOOK AT ME! to great effect. With Active Shield Specialization he can fight defensively or even take a full defense action while being able to his attacks of opportunity and to get the higher bonuses to Defensive Stance. Furious Counterstrike, Defender's Fury, Power Attack, and Devoted Bulwark all combine to allow the Defender to deal very solid damage while being able to absorb many many attacks. The adjustment to Diehard and the extra rerolls given by the class give it extra survivability against magical attacks. Faith Unswerving allows the Defender to be even more mobile than he would otherwise be allowed. All in the character seems very solid, and the numbers it can put up are quite competitive with monsters near his CR. In fact it might be too strong. 105 temporary hitpoints, SR 33, the ability to repeatedly spam the One Last Strike ability of Faith Unswerving for hugely damaging attacks.
-
Now, what's a good CR 16 challenge....
After I find something (MM), let's put this to the test in practice.
-
The Hypertext D20 SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/index.htm) is your friend!
Planetar (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/angel.htm#angelPlanetar), Cornugon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/devil.htm#hornedDevilCornugon), Nightwalker (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/nightshade.htm#nightwalker), to name my favourites. If you're doing this as a proper Same Game challenge at level 16, I also recommend the following:
- A tag-team of Nalfeshnees (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/demon.htm#nalfeshnee)
- A tag-team of
- A [url=http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/giant.htm#stormGiant]Storm Giant and his two drinking buddies (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/nightshade.htm#nightwingNightwings[/url)
- A 14th level necromancer and his Devourer (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/devourer.htm) pets.
That should do it.
-
Good by me. Let's test this sucker.
PBP thread, you think?
-
Just a mental run-by theoretically should be enough at first.
-
Well, someone familiar with the game at this level is going to have to do it. I know the outlines of the theory but neither the details or even many of the general principles.
So, what stuff should he clobber mercilessly, what stuff should he beat a fair amount of the time, what stuff should be 50-50, what stuff should beat him a fair amount of the time, and what stuff should clobber him mercilessly?
The resulting class needs to have a roughly equal amount of stuff in each category.
-
Hang on one second. Are we testing what the class is now, or what you want it to be? If it's the latter, then this isn't even needed - this is what is decided BEFORE the class is Same Game tested.
-
Well, we need to know how it does in practice to know whether or not it is winning all of the time or none of the time.
If it is winning "some of the time", we need to see if it breaks down as it should.
-
Could you post a level 16 build I can make comparisons with? Core-only is best, obviously.
-
http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2464.msg80726#msg80726
I can post someone else's.
-
Ok, the build is level 15, and is decently opted, though not well - about what you could expect someone with reasonable game knowledge to pull off. This means slightly different tests are needed. Here goes, Same Game Test, level 15 version:
A hallway filled with magical traps
You ain't finding them, but you have hit point out the ass, despite having a very poor Reflex save. Essentially, you're wading through damage and SoD effects by this point, and if you fall down into a pit trap, you better hope your buddies fish you out. The only way you are surviving this intact is if most of the traps are the damaging ones.
Result: Probable loss
A Marut (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/inevitable.htm#marut)
You have a slight advantage in initiative, but in all honesty, the difference is tiny enough not to matter much. This thing WILL see you coming, though, and will likely strike at you with something like greater command, which, at DC 19, our Will save fails roughly 2/3rds of the time, by which point you're already a lame cripple. However, most of its attacks target your Fort save, which happens to be your best by FAR, and your range of options keep it from the '5ft dance' casters know and love, while your strikes punch it down to size. In all honesty, it comes down heavily to who wins initiative here, but I believe you have the advantage.
Result: Probable win
Adult Red Dragon
This thing can fly around and breathe on you all day. Even your 'Look at Me' ability will honestly work like 1/3 the time (less if the DM actually lets the dragon use some of its hoard). Even if you do convince it to get into combat with you, you can expect a hard fight.
Result: Probable loss
A Tag-Team of Nightwings (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/nightshade.htm#nightwing)
You are dead beyond measure. These things WILL see you coming, prepare with see invisibility, which you have no way past, and will just alpha strike you before you're ready with haste-powered hold monster-unholy blight-coup-de-grace chains. You honestly stand little chance, as your Will save is pathetic.
Result: Definite loss
6 Stone Golems (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/golem.htm#stoneGolem)
You are in a very, very good place with this combat. Even though they will be spamming slow like crazy, you can take it, because honestly, they'll never kill you anyway.
Result: Definite win
An Evil Necromancer and His Undead Buddies
The hordes won't give you problems, but the necromancer might, especially if he happened to pick up nasty stuff which targets Ref and Will, and figures out how to get his initiative up high to beat yours. All-in-all, though, I don't rate your chances too badly.
Result: Probable win
12 Greater Shadows (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/shadow.htm#greaterShadow)
You are likely dead, since your touch AC blows utterly, and they damage you precisely where it hurts. Swinging back is gonna be a challenge, since half your attacks turn to ass anyway. This is definitely not a place you wanna be anytime soon.
Result: Definite loss
Final tally: 2 probable losses, 2 probable wins, 2 definite losses, 1 definite win.
Overview: Not bad, but slightly subpar. This guy really rocks out against multiple opponents, as well as those that rely on physical attacks and that don't fly. Incorporeality, spells or SLAs that target Ref and Will saves and flight give you immense issues, however.
-
One of my first ideas: Give him Con to Will, not Wis (if he desires).
This may not be enough, but does it help at all?
Reflexes being poor is a major bummer.
"Slow and tough melee" is too limited with both being weak points, and since "Great reflexes" are out, we have to ensure Will is good enough to stand the same abuse Fort can.
-
I agree absolutely - this helps a tonne. Incorp and flight are still big issues, though.
-
Yeah. While the advantages of flight need to be toned down anyway (seperate thread), that cries out for having some way to make sure that fliers don't just play Parthian Plus on him. Even if toned down, this guy is supposed to make Parthians feel ineffective, not the guy they pick on, right?
Moar AC would be a start, but not enough.
As for touch AC (so far as that makes him really suck vs. incorp): That I think is a weakness of armored fighters. And needs to be killed dead.
-
I prefer to take a more 'proactive' solution, rather than give more bonuses. If range is a problem, give him an ability to deflect missiles, for example, or to cover himself with his shield against AoEs, granting resistance, or something else, rather than just giving out more numbers, which drives you right off the RNG cliff and into crazy town (thanks Frank).
Same goes for incorps - I would suggest a specific incorp-busting ability, but at the same time, I don't disagree on the 'low touch AC' problem needing to be made into hamburger. Of the McDonald's type, which I won't eat.
-
Proactive or more bonuses, he still needs "I can deal with this" power/s.
I agree to something more like "Can use his shield to deflect arrows (like the feat, but better because 1/round sucks)" than "+X to AC at all times."
INcorps...we need to generally make them screw over the armored less, which means this isn't something DDs are uniquely sucky against.
Not at all.
Damn Wizards. May the Emperor forsake them, by Saint Sabbat's bones.
-
Well, I think you are forgetting that I didn't spend anywhere near his max wealth per level. So he could have all sorts of goodies from Boots of Striding and Flying to Goggles of True Seeing, etc, etc. Also his SR and his Diehard rerolls combine to produce very effective defense against lots of magical attacks.
-
Yeah, it would have helped to gear out the build properly. With correct gear, I believe it achieves parity, or even slight superiority in the Same Game test. However, flight and incorporeality, as well as stuff which targets Ref and Will (especially) hurts hard - my conclusions are still valid.
-
Oh, crap, when I made the character I'd forgotten that I gave the Defender a good will save. Still doesn't bring it up much, but it certainly helps. It would be 4 higher than the character sheet says it is. Flight isn't actually a problem because a item that grants the Defender flight is really, really cheap. Incorporeality might be a problem, but ghost touch is very cheap, and there are scores of other items he could purchase to deal with it as well. What are failed reflex saves really going to do to him? Now, as for Will saves, yes he's still vulnerable to charms/compulsions/fear and some other things, but really can't that be bought away too?
-
Ah. In that case, I drop all objections. I consider this fix balanced. And will nix it. But give you credit. Fu for you.
-
I'm going to invoke Frank here.
Frank: "Yes it is. If the Fighter is supposed to be "balanced" by whining to the Wizard until the Wizard gets off his ass and makes the Fighter some cool stuff such that the Fighter can start doing some Wizard-like tricks, then the Fighter may as well not even show up.
Hand waving about how Fighters can just get with the program and have magic items which are made by wizards which replicate wizard class features until they are somehow balanced is a kick in the god damned crotch.
You can't ever balance Fighters that way, you've just forced them into the Nodwick role - where their sole contribution to the party is carrying all the Wizard's stuff.
Fvck that. Seriously."
The DD may not be spending lots of cash, but forced to spend cash just to not SUCK instead of to invest in being able to do USEFUL stuff...
Well, Frank said it better than I can.
-
I understand Frank's distaste for a Fighter that has to rely 100% on his items to be effective, but that simply doesn't apply here. The Defender doesn't need to spend all his wealth per level buying items, as you say, just to not suck. He spends like 1/3 of his wealth per level shoring up some weaknesses. He can already pound face against many enemies. And expecting a non-magical character to combat magical defenses like flying and incorporeality without using magic is getting a little ridiculous.
I mean, what do you want? The Defender to gain Forge Lore like the RoW Fighter? Come on. That's not solving the problem, it's merely reflavoring it. What you're describing is a problem with 3.5 period. Players are too item dependant. Spellcasters need items to keep their spells flowing and to keep the save DCs at reasonable levels, just as badly as a Fighter needs items to be able to keep fighting increasingly magical/supernatural foes.
-
The problem is that spellcasters via their spells can DO a lot of stuff.
Fighter: I need an item that lets me fly.
Wizard: I need to remember to prepare fly.
THAT is the problem.
The Defender needs to avoid that situation.
Beyond that, both classes need to be equally dependent (or rather, undependent, but that's a seperate fix) on +X items. That is, belts of Strength and headbands of intellect.
Fighters can't afford a low Con or a low Strength (Finesse fighters just lean on Dex more) just to do their job, a wizard can just boost Int past any level we can imagine.
-
Fighter: I need an item that lets me fly.
Wizard: I need to remember to prepare fly.
THAT is the problem.
The Defender needs to avoid that situation.
How is a Dwarven Defender supposed to avoid that situation without arbitrarily giving it the ability to fly as a class feature for no reason? You're not describing a problem with the PrC as written, but a problem with the entire game as written. I'm just not understanding what you think a Dwarven Defender should be able to do about Flying/Incorporeality/Etc with his class features.
-
Well, personally, I wouldn't mind those being the two "definate loss" if it had two other "definate win", and the others were evenly split between "possible win" and "possible lose".
But that means it needs to be able to deal with an equal number of "definate win" scenarios to the "definate lose", and "possible win" vs. "possible lose", and currently it doesn't.
-
Well, I'd give the Defender a definite win against the Marut, so it comes out pretty close to even then. I'd also give the Defender a draw against the Dragon considering if he's going to fight a dragon he's going to be flying.
-
Not necessarily. A dragon could take advantage of the fact that he isn't and attack him.
Being unable to deal with flying creatures without flying himself makes this a loss. It may be something Individual Character With Flying Boots can deal with, but the Defender does not grant or enhance any abilities to deal with it.
And as stated, having to get equipment just to not get pwned doesn't mean you're not weak against that. By that logic, any weakness can be overcome, just have the doohickey...and we're not measuring doohickeys. We're measuring classes and what someone built to do what the class is designed to do can/can't face.
I don't want any class or individual character ever having "all definate win" scenarios. I want a well built Defender with the kind of things Defenders would have because of what they do to be able to definately win, possibly win, who knows (too close to call), possibly lose, and definately lose an even number of times.
As stated, as written, this is not working.
-
Okay, Elennsar, what do you think a Defender should definitely win against, and how is it not working as written? It has 2 definite wins, 2 definite losses, 1 probable win, and 2 probable losses in 7 encounters. Out of those 7 encounters we are putting him up against 2 encounters in which all of the enemies are flying, 1 encounter where the wizard will almost certainly be flying, and 1 encounter where all of the enemies are incorporeal. That's over half that are targeting his weaknesses, and he's basically putting up just under half success rate. I'd say it's actually working as should be expected.
-
The fact that the he has two probable losses but only one probable win.
He is more likely to lose (4/7) than win (3/7).
3/7=42%. Give or take.
-
Okay, well, in an odd number of encounters he's either going to win more than half or lose more than half. And again, over half of the encounters are one of the two things that he is very weak against - Flight/Incorporeality. The two types of encounters basically ALL mundane warrior types are going to be weak against.
-
The problem is that the only people who aren't are also the people who pwn everything else.
Which is a seperate issue.
If eveyone else also had a 3/4 win/loss, it'd be okay.
But "magic" should not mean "I can deal with any encounter" when "nonmagical" does not.
So, the question is: Does he deal with the encounters he should be able to?
Personally, I'd like him to be able to draw the dragon...it can't hurt him effectively and he can't hurt it effectively.
So, let's see how about the other things.
A 15th level rogue (with or without assassin levels).
A 15th level fighter (Robby's rebalanced 3.5 thread version)
-
Well, what about replacing the huge amount of temporary hit points with a reasonable amount of Damage Reduction and Energy Resistance? DR X/-- equal to his class level +1/2 his non-Defender class levels. 1/2 his character level? Energy Resistance against all types of energy equal to the same, or against one type of energy equal to 5 times that amount (whenever he enters the stance he chooses the type)? That would make him fare better against the Dragon, but also maybe slightly better against the traps, and probably no change to the other encounters.
Honestly I still say he does draw the dragon. You say the dragon might ambush him. I say, he's level 15. If he doesn't have boots of flying he's still got a party, he's just going to be wasting their daily resources rather than a fraction of his large sum of WBL. A Dwarven Defender is never going to be ambushed by a dragon while he's by himself in a real game, but even if the DM's a jerk and the Defender is, and he can't fly, the Defender isn't going to stick around and test his strength. He'll alert the rest of his party.
But then again, this is the problem with this test. It just devolves into a bunch of "what if" scenarios, and since, as you say, anyone can shore up any weakness with magic items it doesn't work to solve anything. DnD is a game with more than 1 player, and where every gameplay experience is different.
-
Yeah. But the DD needs to be able to contribute as much as everyone else. If -everyone- individually goes 3/7, that may be a problem, but its a different problem.
If its just him, something is wrong.
As for the dragon: Screw ambush. The dragon can play Parthian with him. Easily. Even with flying, the DD is still Parthianed.
-
As for the dragon: Screw ambush. The dragon can play Parthian with him. Easily. Even with flyiny, the DD is still Parthianed.
Huh?
-
The dragon is faster (don't think he manuevers as well, assuming a fly or equivalant on the Defender) and can attack from a greater distance.
Thusly, he can Parthian the Defender unless the Defender can (completely) absorb his damage. Or avoid it completely. Either would do. (As in, either high enough DR or high enough AC)
Parthian tactics (IRL, horse archery against slower opponents) are painfully frustrating at best for the defender. You might lose, you might draw, but unless you can catch up and pin him in place, you cannot win.
-
I think a large amount of temp HP that replenishes frequently might help, though not beat the dragon on it's own. It's an inherent problem with any character limited to melee range without special mobility.
-
And without sufficient defenses to be able to do anything but wait until hit points are exhausted.
-
If the temp hp replenishes every round, the dragon would experience a serious desire to land and open up some full attacks on him. But at the very least, melee needs to move around more, mounts and exotic move modes are far more compulsory to a meleer than a wizard(who could just stand there and fire artillery).