PDA

View Full Version : Why is 2-handed superior to Sword and Board?



Zergrusheddie
2009-01-18, 12:37 PM
I've always played a Sword and Board Fighter. My last Fighter was a Dwarf with a +3 Dwarven Waraxe with Fiery and Desicating and a +5 Heavy Shield. Without buffs, he was running at about 38 AC unbuffed and was attacking at roughly 28/23/18 unbuffed. My Dwarven Waraxe was Legendary/Epic and allowed me to use it 2-Hander style for 2d8 19-20 threat range and x4 critical (Normal one hander is 1d10 20 X3). Very rarely did I actually use it as a 2-Hander and most people say that 2-Hander is far superior than Sword and Board. Only I have gotten next to a foolish soft target, I would go Full Power Attack with my Two-Hander.

1 Hander would be 1d10 +15 + 2d6 19-20 X3 AC 38 (~ 27.5 damage a hit)
2 Hander would be 2d8 + 18 + 2d6 17-20 X4 AC 30. (~ 34 damage a hit)
Barring crits, I would gain 23.64% damage at the cost of 26.67% AC. Adding Power Attack would drastically lower by chance to hit but would significantly increase my damage, but no hits means no damage.

I realize that with Shield Specialization and a +5 Shield that my Fighter was meant to have an high AC and not be a 2-Handed Fighter. I've always believed, erroneously perhaps, that it was better to do medium damage and hit 95% of the time than to do High Damage and hit 50% of the time. So, without pounding me into the ground like a railroad spike, why is a 2-Hander more enticing than a 1-Hander aside from the ridiculous FB builsd that get a 12:1 Ratio? :smallconfused:

Best of luck
-Eddie

mostlyharmful
2009-01-18, 12:40 PM
Power attack multipliers for one, the existance of dancing shields for two. Once you've got the cash to get a shield that carries itself then why not?

Thrawn183
2009-01-18, 12:44 PM
A single weapon is cheaper than a weapon and a shield.
You also get bonuses to things like disarm attempts.
You put out more damage due to getting 1.5xStr to damage in addition to the 2:1 Power Attack ratio.

Last, and probably most important is that all the AC in the world won't save you from spells. Yes, you can make a PC that is very difficult to kill with normal attacks, that doesn't make him capable of protecting himself as well as he should or be able to protect his party very easily. Operating under the assumption that everything I just said is true, the best way to protect yourself and the other members of your party is to simply kill your enemy before he can hurt you. Hence why damage is king.

Doing more damage also frees up party members away from needing to throw fireballs and instead doing other things like solid fog.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-01-18, 12:47 PM
mostlyharmful summed it up. Power Attack is the main source of damage for fighters, barbarians, paladins, and similar types. Getting it doubled is great.

Shields are irrelevant, because dealing more damage means you'll end the encounter faster and protect not just yourself, but the entire rest of the party. You need the increased damage more than you need the slightly increased AC.

At higher levels, you can use a dancing shield to make the point moot - you don't have to make a choice between a two-handed weapon and a weapon and shield.

Mushroom Ninja
2009-01-18, 12:47 PM
Sword and Board gets you a bonus to AC that, by mid to High levels, is relatively insignificant. Two Handing something allows you to, via power attack do meaningful damage.

mostlyharmful
2009-01-18, 12:53 PM
Yes, you can make a PC that is very difficult to kill with normal attacks, that doesn't make him capable of protecting himself as well as he should or be able to protect his party very easily

Not through AC boosts, at least not without sinking virtually all your cash into it, Saph has a breakdown I believe from the last thread on this topic but the gist is that to match up against BAB, strength bonus, easily grabed luck, morale, untyped, etc... bonuses your AC needs to be increasing faster than any other stat. a great big sucking cash sink.

Alternately you could pick up a ghost touch weapon and some way of seeing Ethereal and a ring of blink, instant 20% miss chance vs just about everything, stack with a cloak of displacement and you've got the equivilant of very high AC without burning all your cash and bodyslots on it, plus you can get shocktrooper bonuses on your damage for essentially no cost.

BardicDuelist
2009-01-18, 12:59 PM
In 4e, it's arguably the other way around.

Zergrusheddie
2009-01-18, 01:15 PM
Sword and Board gets you a bonus to AC that, by mid to High levels, is relatively insignificant. Two Handing something allows you to, via power attack do meaningful damage.

But doesn't your hit suffer greatly though? It seems like AC is easier to scale than +hit, especially once you start throwing in buffs (aside from most Bard buffs). So, using my two examples:

Fighter A has a Sword and Board (+3 and +5 respectively) AC 38
Fighter B has a 2-Handed Dwarven Waraxe (+5) AC 30

Fighter A must roll a 2, 7, and 12 to hit B. Doing an average of 27.
Fighter B must roll a 6, 11, and 16 to hit A. Does an average of 36.
Damage per round for A would be ~ 56.7
Damage per round for B would be ~ 54.
Plugging in the numbers into http://www.unseelie.org/cgi-bin/powerattack.cgi (Power Attack calculator), it seems that doing a PA attack of 0 is superior meaning that Sword and Board wins. Of course, I may have punched in the numbers wrong....

Now, I will admit again that I centered Sargeras around having as high of an AC as humanly possibly, so I am basically dumbfounded when my 2-Hander is less effective a 1-hander. Obviously, if he has been created wisely too assume a nice Greatsword than he would have smoked Mr. Sword and Board. My question is, how do Fighter survive as 2-Handers with less AC? Our Cleric was dropping Heals on me every 2 or 3 rounds because I was getting hurt; with 8 less AC it would have been scary (unless I dropped one once a round).
Again, how do you get such high damage from PA if you suffer a -10 to hit for +20 damage? I've always seen PA as situational.:smalleek:

Mushroom Ninja
2009-01-18, 01:25 PM
THe 1.5 str also becomes an increasingly powerful aspect of 2H fighting once you start to get a stratospheric strength

Telonius
2009-01-18, 01:27 PM
Our Cleric was dropping Heals on me every 2 or 3 rounds because I was getting hurt; with 8 less AC it would have been scary (unless I dropped one once a round).

This is why 2H is generally better. Even with a ridiculous amount of AC, a lot of your enemies were hitting at least once a round. If you went 2H, and were hitting for about double your amount of damage per round, how many fewer total rounds would you be fighting those enemies? You might not have dropped one a round, but you'd be doing a lot more damage, dropping them faster, therefore taking less overall damage. This is why I say that the best AC is a dead opponent.

EDIT: That's also the logic behind the Shock Trooper strategy. You transfer your to-hit penalty over to an AC penalty - figuring that, hey, you're probably going to get hit anyway, might as well give yourself a terrific chance of hitting for full power attack.

Tengu_temp
2009-01-18, 01:29 PM
You see, most power attackers use Shock Trooper (http://realmshelps.dandello.net/cgi-bin/feats.pl?Shock_Trooper,all) and Leap Attack (http://realmshelps.dandello.net/cgi-bin/feats.pl?Leap_Attack,all). You end up with very low AC for 1 round after the attack, but it doesn't matter if you can one-shot your opponent. And there are many other feats and class features that increase the damage bonus from PA even more.

FMArthur
2009-01-18, 01:29 PM
I don't know why so many people assume a full Power Attack can hit, either. But it doesn't actually matter because with the Shock Trooper feat, you can sacrifice AC instead of BAB for Power Attack (I think it's only on charges...?), with the maximum AC donation still being your BAB.

Flickerdart
2009-01-18, 01:30 PM
But doesn't your hit suffer greatly though? It seems like AC is easier to scale than +hit, especially once you start throwing in buffs (aside from most Bard buffs). So, using my two examples:

Fighter A has a Sword and Board (+3 and +5 respectively) AC 38
Fighter B has a 2-Handed Dwarven Waraxe (+5) AC 30

Fighter A must roll a 2, 7, and 12 to hit B. Doing an average of 27.
Fighter B must roll a 6, 11, and 16 to hit A. Does an average of 36.
Damage per round for A would be ~ 56.7
Damage per round for B would be ~ 54.
Plugging in the numbers into http://www.unseelie.org/cgi-bin/powerattack.cgi (Power Attack calculator), it seems that doing a PA attack of 0 is superior meaning that Sword and Board wins. Of course, I may have punched in the numbers wrong....

Now, I will admit again that I centered Sargeras around having as high of an AC as humanly possibly, so I am basically dumbfounded when my 2-Hander is less effective a 1-hander. Obviously, if he has been created wisely too assume a nice Greatsword than he would have smoked Mr. Sword and Board. My question is, how do Fighter survive as 2-Handers with less AC? Our Cleric was dropping Heals on me every 2 or 3 rounds because I was getting hurt; with 8 less AC it would have been scary (unless I dropped one once a round).
Again, how do you get such high damage from PA if you suffer a -10 to hit for +20 damage? I've always seen PA as situational.:smalleek:
You're supposed to take Shock Trooper and drain from AC instead of to-hit, and then Pounce/Lion's Charge/whatever to full attack with an insane bonus. Your AC will be in the negatives, but it won't matter because you just dealt hundreds of damage to the thing in front of you. And maybe Cleaved the thing next to you for just as much. And then Robilar's Gambit to AOO everyone that attacks you for the same amount of damage, meaning they only get one hit in before they die, against which your HP is sufficient buffer. And all of that is multiplied by 2 thanks to 2:1 PA. Or Spirited Charge with 3x multiplier.

Mushroom Ninja
2009-01-18, 01:32 PM
This is why 2H is generally better. Even with a ridiculous amount of AC, a lot of your enemies were hitting at least once a round. If you went 2H, and were hitting for about double your amount of damage per round, how many fewer total rounds would you be fighting those enemies? You might not have dropped one a round, but you'd be doing a lot more damage, dropping them faster, therefore taking less overall damage. This is why I say that the best AC is a dead opponent.

I definitely agree.

I was just checking up the attack bonuses of CR20 dragons. Most of them are high enough to hit an AC 38 fighter on anything but a nat. 1.

Tengu_temp
2009-01-18, 01:36 PM
In 4e, it's arguably the other way around.

I'd say it depends on the group composition - if you're the only defender in the group, you surely do need a shield, but if there is another one then it's not 100% necessary. And warlords and barbarians are better off with a two-hander.

The Glyphstone
2009-01-18, 01:37 PM
And with all the various ways to ensure that you get to charge multiple times, whether through Anklets of translocation, Sudden Leap maneuvers, or simply having more than one enemy to pinball between, the effectiveness of ShockTrooper goes up immensely.

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 01:39 PM
Eh, the Two-Handed Fighter on those levels has an Animated Shield (+2 ability) with two points less of enhancement than the Sword & Board character. Acs would be 38 and 36 respectively. Out of core, Magic Vestment comes in and means you shouldn't have more than +1 in the shield, meaning both characters have equal AC, other deals 1.5 the damage. Also, your attack bonuses are way low. This appears like level 20. So your attack bonuses should look like:

20 BAB + 12 Str (18 start + 5 levels + 5 inherent + 6 item) + 5 magic weapon + a bunch of morale/luck/speed/whatever bonuses (haste, bless, prayer, righteous wrath of the faithful, etc.). Let's just say that +43 or so is average. Here is a 3.5 Power Attack Calculator (http://direpress.bin.sh/tools/power.html) (huge difference, 3.0 didn't have 2x PA returns). As you can see, your AC doesn't really matter except for the third and fourth iteratives.

That means you could PA for 6 (BAB +20, additional modifiers +23, Full Attack + 1 from Haste, 2d4+18 Str+5 damage, +2d6 extra dice from Holy) for 173.40 vs. normal 158.76. One-handed weapon without PA does 148.19 and with -10 PA 168.80. Either way, normal loses. But this is not the major thing.


The major thing is that the 1v1 fight isn't what matters. This is a party game. Normal CR 20 opponent has no incentive to go after the S&B fighter first. Therefore your AC is wasted until the Wizard, the Cleric and the Rogue are all dead. Furthermore, you're much more likely to be hit with magical attacks, which again means your AC is wasted. In both sitiuations, damage is not wasted; the faster you kill the opponent, the less Power Words, Dominates, etc. he'll have time to throw around. Same with allies, the faster you kill it, the less time it has to rape your allies. Therefore, the build with more damage is much better equipped to help the party.

To further compound this is the fact that even with your major AC, CR appropriate opponents hit you on 1 (see: Balor, Old Black Dragon, the Tarrasque, Pit Fiend, etc.). So all your AC does is limit how much the opponent gets to PA...if they want to melee you at all. Likely scenario is that they bombard your party from afar and when you get that hit in, you better make it count. Many two-handed weapons have Reach, which allows a two-handed fighter to better protect his allies from these monsters' melee and to force the opponent to a straight fight.

Also buys you extra attacks against opponents of the same size. Simple fact of the matter is that beyond like level 5, you'll be autohitting most ACs and therefore, PA is awesome. And on the same token, intelligent opponents will probably not melee the heaviest armored guy unless he has a means to force them to; they'd rather walk past him and go hit the guys who do more damage and are squishier. Reach, tripping, etc. help with those, S&B can do none of it. And Animated Shields mean that the AC difference never grows larger than 2 points.

Zergrusheddie
2009-01-18, 01:42 PM
You might not have dropped one a round, but you'd be doing a lot more damage, dropping them faster, therefore taking less overall damage. This is why I say that the best AC is a dead opponent.

I figured that's what it would be. But I am still wondering how it does so much damage if the +hit is suffered due to PA. A lot of people on this forum say that PA is the be-all and end-all of feats; it should be used almost all the time. Well, again an opponent who has 35 AC I would need 7/12/17 to hit. Power Attack will add loads of damage, but it doesn't matter if I do 300 damage a hit if I can't actually hit things. Full PA at level 15 with a 30 Strength (assuming a Barbarian11/Fighter4 with Greater Rage), +5 Great Sword, would be 2d6 + 52 with a +17/12/7 hit; average of 59 a whack. He would need an 18 and 2 20s to hit; this is an average damage a round of 14.75. Obviously against such a tough opponent, full PA is impossible and would probably do an average of 29 a hit and will most likely hit at least twice.
If PA is to be used most of the time, is there a way to mitigate it's effects? I know Shock Trooper is fantastic at it but how many times a fight will you do that, especially at the same foe?

The Glyphstone
2009-01-18, 01:44 PM
Anklets of Translocation, Sudden Leap, Dimension Hop, Benign Transposition....a surprising number if you plan for it.

Zergrusheddie
2009-01-18, 01:50 PM
Also, your attack bonuses are way low. This appears like level 20...

Nope, only made level 15 with Sargeras. The rest of your post was pretty damn convincing though.:smallwink:

Yeah, I noticed that Dragons will hit on anything higher than a 6 or so. Even if the Dragon could not hit me, he could simply devour the squishies and save his breathe weapon just for me.

Blood_Lord
2009-01-18, 01:50 PM
But doesn't your hit suffer greatly though? It seems like AC is easier to scale than +hit, especially once you start throwing in buffs (aside from most Bard buffs). So, using my two examples:

Fighter A has a Sword and Board (+3 and +5 respectively) AC 38
Fighter B has a 2-Handed Dwarven Waraxe (+5) AC 30

Fighter A must roll a 2, 7, and 12 to hit B. Doing an average of 27.
Fighter B must roll a 6, 11, and 16 to hit A. Does an average of 36.
Damage per round for A would be ~ 56.7
Damage per round for B would be ~ 54.
Plugging in the numbers into http://www.unseelie.org/cgi-bin/powerattack.cgi (Power Attack calculator), it seems that doing a PA attack of 0 is superior meaning that Sword and Board wins. Of course, I may have punched in the numbers wrong....

Now, I will admit again that I centered Sargeras around having as high of an AC as humanly possibly, so I am basically dumbfounded when my 2-Hander is less effective a 1-hander. Obviously, if he has been created wisely too assume a nice Greatsword than he would have smoked Mr. Sword and Board. My question is, how do Fighter survive as 2-Handers with less AC? Our Cleric was dropping Heals on me every 2 or 3 rounds because I was getting hurt; with 8 less AC it would have been scary (unless I dropped one once a round).
Again, how do you get such high damage from PA if you suffer a -10 to hit for +20 damage? I've always seen PA as situational.:smalleek:

Your problem is a common one, expect Ericgrau to show up and demonstrate it again.

This is predicated on the false assumption that AC scales faster then AB.

are those Fighters level 20?

A level 20 Fighter can have +3 Dex, +8 Full plate, +5 enhancement, +5 deflection, +5 natural Armor, +4 Tower Shield, +5enhancement, +2 dodge for 45 AC. At the cost of about 300,000gp.

A level 20 THFer could spend 63,500gp on a str boosting, buy the haste boots, and get a +5 weapon (or GMW) and have a AB of +12 Str, +2 Weapon Focus, +20 BAB, +5 enhancement, +2 untyped, +2 morale, +1 luck, and be looking at +44 to hit.

Given 1.5 times Str and Power attack, (which is very valuable when you autohit on your first attack)

For any given value of AC/AB, a Fighter can get a higher AB for a lesser cost. It's really just that easy. A THFer with a miss chance actually has a lesser chance of getting hit then a Sword/Board.

Make a level X fighter. Now go look at all the monsters in the MM that would actually attack your Fighter (IE not spellcasters). What's their AB? How often are they likely to hit? What's their AC?

And just to address a comment in your initial post. Hitting 95% of the time for 10 damage is much worse then hitting 20% of the time for 100 damage. But it isn't even that, because THFers hit more often too.

EDIT: You had a Barbarian/Fighter with a Str of 30 in rage at level 15? Yeah, that's your problem, try actually increasing your AB instead of your AC.

Level 15 Barbarian AB:
Str: 18 base +4 race, +6 item, + 3 Inherent, +6 rage= 37 str for +13 to hit.
+15 BAB, +2 untyped Haste boots, +2 morale from heroism, +5 weapon= AB of +37/+35/+30. Notice that if he doesn't power attack he auto hits on the first attack, and then follows with a hit on a 3.

Zergrusheddie
2009-01-18, 02:04 PM
Your problem is a common one, expect Ericgrau to show up and demonstrate it again.
EDIT: You had a Barbarian/Fighter with a Str of 30 in rage at level 15? Yeah, that's your problem, try actually increasing your AB instead of your AC.

Level 15 Barbarian AB:
Str: 18 base +4 race, +6 item, + 3 Inherent, +6 rage= 37 str for +13 to hit.
+15 BAB, +2 untyped Haste boots, +2 morale from heroism, +5 weapon= AB of +37/+35/+30. Notice that if he doesn't power attack he auto hits on the first attack, and then follows with a hit on a 3.

No, Sarge was flat fighter 15. He was specced for pure Sword and Board. Like I said before, I have the mindset of Sword and Board and am just trying to understand why people say that THF is superior. I'm not trying to make petty arguments, just showing my thinking; it helps so people don't just say "THF is much better; lern2play."


Though, lerning2play is also probably necessary on my part....:smallredface:

The Glyphstone
2009-01-18, 02:09 PM
Have we managed to answer your questions yet? S&B does have its perks, but they're mostly at low levels where having a high AC does matter.

ericgrau
2009-01-18, 02:16 PM
Hi BloodLord, do you want to duel your THF w/o shield vs. my SAB yet, or fight the same monster from the MM? Still waiting for you to post a build (and PM me / etc. so I can find it). And guess what I recently found in my notes :smallbiggrin::

AVERAGE MONSTER STATS:

hp init AC touch ff_ac bab fort ref will
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1/10 (2 detail records)
Avg 1.00 1.50 15.50 15.50 14.00 0.00 2.00 3.50 2.00
Max 1 2 16 16 14 0 2 4 2
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1/8 (2 detail records)
Avg 1.00 2.00 14.00 14.00 12.00 0.00 2.00 3.00 0.50
Max 1 2 14 14 12 0 2 4 1
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1/6 (4 detail records)
Avg 4.50 1.75 13.75 13.25 12.00 0.25 2.50 4.00 1.00
Max 11 2 14 14 12 1 4 4 2
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1/4 (8 detail records)
Avg 3.88 1.75 14.50 13.25 12.75 0.25 2.50 2.88 0.38
Max 11 3 17 15 14 1 4 5 2
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1/3 (7 detail records)
Avg 4.43 2.57 15.71 13.14 13.71 0.14 2.29 3.14 1.14
Max 6 5 17 15 16 1 4 5 3
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1/2 (29 detail records)
Avg 6.59 1.41 14.69 11.86 13.38 0.76 2.62 2.00 0.03
Max 16 4 18 16 18 2 5 6 3
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1 (46 detail records)
Avg 12.24 1.54 15.28 11.78 13.80 1.28 3.00 2.85 0.98
Max 31 7 23 20 18 3 6 6 5
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 2 (51 detail records)
Avg 20.55 2.39 15.76 11.84 13.94 2.33 4.35 4.35 2.69
Max 42 8 23 15 22 5 8 10 6
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 3 (72 detail records)
Avg 27.26 2.68 16.14 11.51 14.64 3.30 4.58 4.18 3.31
Max 55 9 23 18 23 6 9 9 7
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 4 (40 detail records)
Avg 48.23 2.23 16.00 10.45 15.05 5.20 6.45 5.10 4.60
Max 94 6 20 18 20 9 11 9 9
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 5 (51 detail records)
Avg 56.33 3.16 17.16 10.55 15.73 6.08 7.47 5.82 4.82
Max 95 11 25 16 25 11 12 13 10
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 6 (26 detail records)
Avg 69.12 3.27 18.88 11.00 17.27 7.60 8.08 6.85 6.08
Max 133 13 29 29 24 12 14 12 12
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 7 (45 detail records)
Avg 86.98 2.91 18.07 10.38 16.44 8.38 8.67 6.98 6.56
Max 152 13 25 17 24 13 15 19 12
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 8 (31 detail records)
Avg 96.48 3.19 20.00 10.58 18.32 9.43 9.19 7.65 7.45
Max 180 10 27 20 26 15 16 14 11
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 9 (31 detail records)
Avg 130.65 3.61 21.74 10.45 19.68 11.97 12.13 9.81 8.58
Max 230 14 29 18 28 18 19 22 13
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 10 (19 detail records)
Avg 136.53 2.79 22.58 9.26 21.42 13.21 11.63 8.58 9.11
Max 305 8 33 13 33 24 22 19 14
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 11 (24 detail records)
Avg 163.83 3.96 23.71 10.92 21.38 14.25 13.75 10.63 10.3
Max 228 15 29 25 27 24 20 25 14
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 12 (12 detail records)
Avg 196.33 1.58 21.75 7.17 21.42 17.00 15.42 9.33 9.08
Max 300 5 28 13 28 30 25 12 15
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 13 (12 detail records)
Avg 167.00 2.92 27.33 10.25 26.00 14.42 14.17 9.83 12.4
Max 230 5 32 14 31 20 18 14 16
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 14 (12 detail records)
Avg 180.33 4.50 27.00 11.00 25.17 16.17 15.92 11.83 14.0
Max 287 8 35 14 35 23 19 13 18
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 15 (8 detail records)
Avg 224.63 3.50 29.75 8.13 29.50 18.88 15.75 10.63 15.8
Max 312 5 34 11 33 24 19 14 20
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 16 (11 detail records)
Avg 239.09 4.27 31.91 10.00 30.73 21.18 17.09 13.27 16.6
Max 378 8 42 16 42 31 23 16 23
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 17 (7 detail records)
Avg 244.86 3.29 28.00 9.57 26.86 20.14 19.57 11.29 16.2
Max 337 7 34 13 34 27 25 15 19
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 18 (8 detail records)
Avg 302.25 6.00 32.75 8.50 31.25 24.25 19.50 15.63 19.0
Max 375 20 37 14 37 30 23 24 23
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 19 (10 detail records)
Avg 355.80 4.80 36.00 9.20 35.20 27.60 22.10 16.30 19.7
Max 445 12 38 16 38 33 25 20 21
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 20 (9 detail records)
Avg 409.33 6.00 36.44 9.11 34.44 29.56 24.22 18.67 21.2
Max 858 12 40 17 39 48 38 29 23
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 21 (13 detail records)
Avg 393.00 4.31 38.69 8.77 37.31 27.69 23.31 16.15 20.5
Max 522 7 51 17 44 36 28 22 25
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 22 (9 detail records)
Avg 452.33 7.44 40.22 11.56 36.33 29.56 23.00 19.67 23.7
Max 536 22 47 24 47 37 28 25 27
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 23 (11 detail records)
Avg 480.09 8.27 39.91 12.45 35.27 31.00 26.00 21.82 24.6
Max 893 18 46 28 42 38 41 35 28
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 24 (8 detail records)
Avg 622.25 9.25 42.38 12.88 37.75 37.50 29.50 24.25 27.3
Max 900 27 44 40 44 48 39 38 38
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 25 (11 detail records)
Avg 600.27 8.55 44.18 18.36 39.82 34.09 27.55 24.00 28.7
Max 1105 26 52 50 50 40 45 36 41
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 26 (7 detail records)
Avg 420.29 10.43 44.29 27.14 39.57 27.00 21.14 20.14 26.2
Max 680 17 50 48 43 40 32 29 32
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 27 (4 detail records)
Avg 625.25 10.00 46.75 19.25 40.25 43.50 31.75 27.75 32.7
Max 817 20 52 32 45 75 40 37 41
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 28 (4 detail records)
Avg 894.25 16.25 53.50 26.50 43.25 42.50 37.00 37.00 31.5
Max 1102 25 57 47 57 60 45 44 35
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 29 (2 detail records)
Avg 472.00 12.00 50.50 30.00 42.50 21.50 25.00 25.50 24.5
Max 814 17 51 38 48 33 40 39 32
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 30 (4 detail records)
Avg 1064.25 2.00 40.75 13.50 40.25 48.25 36.00 26.25 38.7
Max 1785 6 58 26 58 70 47 37 50
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 31 (2 detail records)
Avg 788.50 3.50 58.00 16.00 56.50 42.50 34.00 24.50 33.5
Max 877 4 64 20 64 45 37 25 38
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 32 (1 detail record)
Avg 433.00 18.00 40.00 20.00 30.00 42.00 19.00 29.00 29.0
Max 433 18 40 20 30 42 19 29 29
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 33 (2 detail records)
Avg 605.50 -2.00 60.00 0.00 60.00 72.00 32.00 30.00 33.0
Max 608 -2 60 0 60 72 32 30 33
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 34 (2 detail records)
Avg 1100.00 9.50 54.00 16.00 50.50 52.50 42.00 32.50 39.5
Max 1362 15 61 19 61 62 48 42 43
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 35 (5 detail records)
Avg 1011.80 12.60 62.00 13.80 53.20 48.40 41.60 34.20 31.0
Max 1075 24 67 18 67 50 46 52 43
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 36 (1 detail record)
Avg 1676.00 11.00 58.00 3.00 57.00 72.00 55.00 47.00 39.0
Max 1676 11 58 3 57 72 55 47 39
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 37 (1 detail record)
Avg 1292.00 4.00 74.00 20.00 74.00 55.00 46.00 29.00 47.0
Max 1292 4 74 20 74 55 46 29 47
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 39 (3 detail records)
Avg 1430.00 7.00 66.67 18.00 62.33 68.00 55.67 37.67 45.0
Max 1728 13 81 22 81 96 75 55 52
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 41 (1 detail record)
Avg 1856.00 14.00 58.00 16.00 44.00 96.00 76.00 56.00 42.0
Max 1856 14 58 16 44 96 76 56 42
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 42 (1 detail record)
Avg 1984.00 12.00 60.00 14.00 48.00 96.00 77.00 54.00 42.0
Max 1984 12 60 14 48 96 77 54 42
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 43 (2 detail records)
Avg 1516.00 4.00 79.50 21.50 79.50 59.00 50.00 31.00 50.5
Max 1787 4 88 24 88 65 55 34 56
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 48 (1 detail record)
Avg 1479.00 4.00 78.00 21.00 78.00 58.00 50.00 31.00 50.0
Max 1479 4 78 21 78 58 50 31 50
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 50 (2 detail records)
Avg 2472.50 7.00 83.50 19.00 78.50 83.00 72.00 44.50 51.5
Max 2880 10 95 26 95 96 84 52 61
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 52 (1 detail record)
Avg 1732.00 4.00 85.00 23.00 85.00 63.00 54.00 33.00 54.0
Max 1732 4 85 23 85 63 54 33 54
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 57 (2 detail records)
Avg 1517.00 7.00 81.00 26.50 81.00 60.00 49.00 33.00 43.0
Max 2006 10 92 28 92 68 59 36 59
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 59 (1 detail record)
Avg 2362.00 4.00 102.00 28.00 102.00 75.00 64.00 39.00 65.0
Max 2362 4 102 28 102 75 64 39 65
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 61 (1 detail record)
Avg 2299.00 4.00 99.00 27.00 99.00 73.00 63.00 38.00 63.0
Max 2299 4 99 27 99 73 63 38 63
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 66 (1 detail record)
Avg 2613.00 4.00 106.00 29.00 106.00 78.00 68.00 41.00 68.0
Max 2613 4 106 29 106 78 68 41 68

Total AB is missing, unfortunately, so we'll have to find a monster with the same BAB and fill it in. You'll note that AC keeps up with level. The same is true in my builds. Power attack (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87339) doesn't work well when this is true; it is mainly good against mooks. Part of the problem is that most people don't know how to get cheap AC from multiple sources, and fall behind at mid to high levels. But you'll notice anyone who ever posts a SAB build manages it just fine. Monk builds too for some strange reason, perhaps out of spite / remorse over their low AC (they progress linearly w/ level too, but they start behind and thus stay behind). An animated shield THFAB will beat SAB at mid-to-high levels, though. But that involves pumping AC just the same. Simulations I did found that it was worthwhile to pump AC as long as ~75% of monsters target AC. At around 50% it's better to just put a couple +1's in AC. However, most monsters in games I see target AC, with just a few that don't.

OP: You can also search. This comes up a lot, and is a subject of debate. But like other hot topics one side wants to pretend that it isn't even debatable.

Zergrusheddie
2009-01-18, 02:17 PM
Have we managed to answer your questions yet? S&B does have its perks, but they're mostly at low levels where having a high AC does matter.

Yes, you have. Thanks to everyone for being helpful and constructive. Just one final question:
Is going Sword and Board at lower levels (say 2 or 3) worth while when having Leap Attack, Shock Trooper, and a high enough PA is not possible?

Yakk
2009-01-18, 02:19 PM
S+B vs 2H:

S+B is built around doing less damage and having more AC. But attack growth far outstrips AC in many situations (especially per unit effort), and the return on AC is reduced as attack approaches AC.

If your AC is 19 points higher than the enemy attack modifier, you are in good shape -- you soak 95% of incoming damage. Losing a point of AC doubles the incoming damage.

If your AC is 15 points higher than the enemy attack modifier you take 1 hit in 4. Each point of AC changes your damage mitigation by 20%.

If your AC is 10 points higher than the enemy attack modifier, you take 1 hit in 2. Each point of AC changes your damage mitigation by 10%.

If your AC is 5 points higher than the enemy attack modifier, you take 3 hits in 4. Each point of AC changes your damage mitigation by 7%.

If your AC is 0 points higher than the enemy attack modifier, you take 19 hits in 20. Each point of AC has little effect.

At the high end -- when it is nearly impossible to hit you -- each point of AC is worth alot.

But D&D in 3e -- more of the situations happen where the enemies attack bonus is close to, or sometimes exceeding, even well optimized AC. And at those points, the return on AC investment is low. About the only thing you do is make the enemy power attack for less, if you are lucky.

And with feats like Shock Trooper, your AC has no impact on enemy power attack amount -- rather, your damage output does!

There aren't that many "scaling" abilities that make having a shield kick ass. There is no "soak 2 to 5 times your character level in damage against each attack when you use a shield" feat-chain, which is analogous to the power attack feat chain.

Finally, AC (especially armor AC) isn't a universal defense -- it defends against a narrow range of attacks. So your sacrifice of damage output for defense produces a defensive AC line that tends to be ineffective, and can be bypassed by entire categories of opponents.

Meanwhile, because ATK is so easy to boost, and weapon damage is relatively hard to be completely immune to, the character who goes two handed then leverages their damage output to the stratosphere ... is useful in nearly any situation.

Finally, a character that is nearly indestructible, but cannot do serious harm, is a character the bad guys can simply ignore. By medium-high levels in 3e, the situations in which you can compel or seriously encourage bad guys to attack you and not the real threat shrinks.

So note that your character, with no serious investment in 2H fighting, is doing a good +30% damage when they switch to two handed fighting. With modest investment, you could boost that to +200% or +300%. And all of a sudden, the fight length halves, while you are only taking 50% more damage per round...

Blood_Lord
2009-01-18, 02:20 PM
No, Sarge was flat fighter 15. He was specced for pure Sword and Board. Like I said before, I have the mindset of Sword and Board and am just trying to understand why people say that THF is superior. I'm not trying to make petty arguments, just showing my thinking; it helps so people don't just say "THF is much better; lern2play."

Yes, and my point is that you said 30str for a level 11 Barb/5 fighter. But there is no reason to have that. Because a level 11 Barbarian should have 36 str during a rage, not even counting the next few levels.

The point is that if you spec for AB with a TH character, you basically autohit with your first attack, and since the best way to increase AB is to increase Str, you also do more damage. Add in power attack, for your auto-hits, and things get even better.

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 02:25 PM
Yes, you have. Thanks to everyone for being helpful and constructive. Just one final question:
Is going Sword and Board at lower levels (say 2 or 3) worth while when having Leap Attack, Shock Trooper, and a high enough PA is not possible?

S&B is ok on low levels, but generally you'll want a reach weapon to better tank (that is, force opponents to hit you instead of the squishies who are even more squishy on the low levels). With ToB, it's a whole different story of course; your S&B suddenly gains the ability to protect his allies (and to counter opponent's hits eventually) and to deal decent damage without PA. But without ToB, S&B is decent (only a bit worse than THF in party game, about the same in 1v1) on low levels (hope there're some choke points available in each combat where you can force opponent to face you) and gets constantly weaker as you go higher.

Blood_Lord
2009-01-18, 02:28 PM
AVERAGE MONSTER STATS:

hp init AC touch ff_ac bab fort ref will
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1/10 (2 detail records)
Avg 1.00 1.50 15.50 15.50 14.00 0.00 2.00 3.50 2.00
Max 1 2 16 16 14 0 2 4 2
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1/8 (2 detail records)
Avg 1.00 2.00 14.00 14.00 12.00 0.00 2.00 3.00 0.50
Max 1 2 14 14 12 0 2 4 1
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1/6 (4 detail records)
Avg 4.50 1.75 13.75 13.25 12.00 0.25 2.50 4.00 1.00
Max 11 2 14 14 12 1 4 4 2
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1/4 (8 detail records)
Avg 3.88 1.75 14.50 13.25 12.75 0.25 2.50 2.88 0.38
Max 11 3 17 15 14 1 4 5 2
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1/3 (7 detail records)
Avg 4.43 2.57 15.71 13.14 13.71 0.14 2.29 3.14 1.14
Max 6 5 17 15 16 1 4 5 3
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1/2 (29 detail records)
Avg 6.59 1.41 14.69 11.86 13.38 0.76 2.62 2.00 0.03
Max 16 4 18 16 18 2 5 6 3
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 1 (46 detail records)
Avg 12.24 1.54 15.28 11.78 13.80 1.28 3.00 2.85 0.98
Max 31 7 23 20 18 3 6 6 5
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 2 (51 detail records)
Avg 20.55 2.39 15.76 11.84 13.94 2.33 4.35 4.35 2.69
Max 42 8 23 15 22 5 8 10 6
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 3 (72 detail records)
Avg 27.26 2.68 16.14 11.51 14.64 3.30 4.58 4.18 3.31
Max 55 9 23 18 23 6 9 9 7
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 4 (40 detail records)
Avg 48.23 2.23 16.00 10.45 15.05 5.20 6.45 5.10 4.60
Max 94 6 20 18 20 9 11 9 9
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 5 (51 detail records)
Avg 56.33 3.16 17.16 10.55 15.73 6.08 7.47 5.82 4.82
Max 95 11 25 16 25 11 12 13 10
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 6 (26 detail records)
Avg 69.12 3.27 18.88 11.00 17.27 7.60 8.08 6.85 6.08
Max 133 13 29 29 24 12 14 12 12
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 7 (45 detail records)
Avg 86.98 2.91 18.07 10.38 16.44 8.38 8.67 6.98 6.56
Max 152 13 25 17 24 13 15 19 12
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 8 (31 detail records)
Avg 96.48 3.19 20.00 10.58 18.32 9.43 9.19 7.65 7.45
Max 180 10 27 20 26 15 16 14 11
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 9 (31 detail records)
Avg 130.65 3.61 21.74 10.45 19.68 11.97 12.13 9.81 8.58
Max 230 14 29 18 28 18 19 22 13
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 10 (19 detail records)
Avg 136.53 2.79 22.58 9.26 21.42 13.21 11.63 8.58 9.11
Max 305 8 33 13 33 24 22 19 14
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 11 (24 detail records)
Avg 163.83 3.96 23.71 10.92 21.38 14.25 13.75 10.63 10.3
Max 228 15 29 25 27 24 20 25 14
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 12 (12 detail records)
Avg 196.33 1.58 21.75 7.17 21.42 17.00 15.42 9.33 9.08
Max 300 5 28 13 28 30 25 12 15
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 13 (12 detail records)
Avg 167.00 2.92 27.33 10.25 26.00 14.42 14.17 9.83 12.4
Max 230 5 32 14 31 20 18 14 16
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 14 (12 detail records)
Avg 180.33 4.50 27.00 11.00 25.17 16.17 15.92 11.83 14.0
Max 287 8 35 14 35 23 19 13 18
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 15 (8 detail records)
Avg 224.63 3.50 29.75 8.13 29.50 18.88 15.75 10.63 15.8
Max 312 5 34 11 33 24 19 14 20
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 16 (11 detail records)
Avg 239.09 4.27 31.91 10.00 30.73 21.18 17.09 13.27 16.6
Max 378 8 42 16 42 31 23 16 23
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 17 (7 detail records)
Avg 244.86 3.29 28.00 9.57 26.86 20.14 19.57 11.29 16.2
Max 337 7 34 13 34 27 25 15 19
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 18 (8 detail records)
Avg 302.25 6.00 32.75 8.50 31.25 24.25 19.50 15.63 19.0
Max 375 20 37 14 37 30 23 24 23
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 19 (10 detail records)
Avg 355.80 4.80 36.00 9.20 35.20 27.60 22.10 16.30 19.7
Max 445 12 38 16 38 33 25 20 21
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 20 (9 detail records)
Avg 409.33 6.00 36.44 9.11 34.44 29.56 24.22 18.67 21.2
Max 858 12 40 17 39 48 38 29 23
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 21 (13 detail records)
Avg 393.00 4.31 38.69 8.77 37.31 27.69 23.31 16.15 20.5
Max 522 7 51 17 44 36 28 22 25
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 22 (9 detail records)
Avg 452.33 7.44 40.22 11.56 36.33 29.56 23.00 19.67 23.7
Max 536 22 47 24 47 37 28 25 27
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 23 (11 detail records)
Avg 480.09 8.27 39.91 12.45 35.27 31.00 26.00 21.82 24.6
Max 893 18 46 28 42 38 41 35 28
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 24 (8 detail records)
Avg 622.25 9.25 42.38 12.88 37.75 37.50 29.50 24.25 27.3
Max 900 27 44 40 44 48 39 38 38
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 25 (11 detail records)
Avg 600.27 8.55 44.18 18.36 39.82 34.09 27.55 24.00 28.7
Max 1105 26 52 50 50 40 45 36 41
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 26 (7 detail records)
Avg 420.29 10.43 44.29 27.14 39.57 27.00 21.14 20.14 26.2
Max 680 17 50 48 43 40 32 29 32
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 27 (4 detail records)
Avg 625.25 10.00 46.75 19.25 40.25 43.50 31.75 27.75 32.7
Max 817 20 52 32 45 75 40 37 41
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 28 (4 detail records)
Avg 894.25 16.25 53.50 26.50 43.25 42.50 37.00 37.00 31.5
Max 1102 25 57 47 57 60 45 44 35
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 29 (2 detail records)
Avg 472.00 12.00 50.50 30.00 42.50 21.50 25.00 25.50 24.5
Max 814 17 51 38 48 33 40 39 32
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 30 (4 detail records)
Avg 1064.25 2.00 40.75 13.50 40.25 48.25 36.00 26.25 38.7
Max 1785 6 58 26 58 70 47 37 50
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 31 (2 detail records)
Avg 788.50 3.50 58.00 16.00 56.50 42.50 34.00 24.50 33.5
Max 877 4 64 20 64 45 37 25 38
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 32 (1 detail record)
Avg 433.00 18.00 40.00 20.00 30.00 42.00 19.00 29.00 29.0
Max 433 18 40 20 30 42 19 29 29
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 33 (2 detail records)
Avg 605.50 -2.00 60.00 0.00 60.00 72.00 32.00 30.00 33.0
Max 608 -2 60 0 60 72 32 30 33
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 34 (2 detail records)
Avg 1100.00 9.50 54.00 16.00 50.50 52.50 42.00 32.50 39.5
Max 1362 15 61 19 61 62 48 42 43
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 35 (5 detail records)
Avg 1011.80 12.60 62.00 13.80 53.20 48.40 41.60 34.20 31.0
Max 1075 24 67 18 67 50 46 52 43
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 36 (1 detail record)
Avg 1676.00 11.00 58.00 3.00 57.00 72.00 55.00 47.00 39.0
Max 1676 11 58 3 57 72 55 47 39
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 37 (1 detail record)
Avg 1292.00 4.00 74.00 20.00 74.00 55.00 46.00 29.00 47.0
Max 1292 4 74 20 74 55 46 29 47
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 39 (3 detail records)
Avg 1430.00 7.00 66.67 18.00 62.33 68.00 55.67 37.67 45.0
Max 1728 13 81 22 81 96 75 55 52
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 41 (1 detail record)
Avg 1856.00 14.00 58.00 16.00 44.00 96.00 76.00 56.00 42.0
Max 1856 14 58 16 44 96 76 56 42
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 42 (1 detail record)
Avg 1984.00 12.00 60.00 14.00 48.00 96.00 77.00 54.00 42.0
Max 1984 12 60 14 48 96 77 54 42
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 43 (2 detail records)
Avg 1516.00 4.00 79.50 21.50 79.50 59.00 50.00 31.00 50.5
Max 1787 4 88 24 88 65 55 34 56
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 48 (1 detail record)
Avg 1479.00 4.00 78.00 21.00 78.00 58.00 50.00 31.00 50.0
Max 1479 4 78 21 78 58 50 31 50
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 50 (2 detail records)
Avg 2472.50 7.00 83.50 19.00 78.50 83.00 72.00 44.50 51.5
Max 2880 10 95 26 95 96 84 52 61
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 52 (1 detail record)
Avg 1732.00 4.00 85.00 23.00 85.00 63.00 54.00 33.00 54.0
Max 1732 4 85 23 85 63 54 33 54
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 57 (2 detail records)
Avg 1517.00 7.00 81.00 26.50 81.00 60.00 49.00 33.00 43.0
Max 2006 10 92 28 92 68 59 36 59
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 59 (1 detail record)
Avg 2362.00 4.00 102.00 28.00 102.00 75.00 64.00 39.00 65.0
Max 2362 4 102 28 102 75 64 39 65
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 61 (1 detail record)
Avg 2299.00 4.00 99.00 27.00 99.00 73.00 63.00 38.00 63.0
Max 2299 4 99 27 99 73 63 38 63
Summary for 'challenge_rating' = 66 (1 detail record)
Avg 2613.00 4.00 106.00 29.00 106.00 78.00 68.00 41.00 68.0
Max 2613 4 106 29 106 78 68 41 68

Total AB is missing, unfortunately, so we'll have to find a monster with the same BAB and fill it in. You'll note that AC rises faster than level. The same is true in my builds.

{Scrubbed}.

There is no human being alive who can actually generate useful information from what you just posted. And ironically, it's missing the only number that has any bearing on your actual point, total AB.

And of course, you don't label anything, so you probably count in the BAB of Lich Wizards and other characters that don't make attacks. Or Basilisks, who literally don't ****ing care about their single attack.

Oh, and then you make fun of the THFing "fans" for never providing numbers, even though this thread is full of numbers. (Numbers that, unlike yours are actually easily deciphered.)

Zergrusheddie
2009-01-18, 02:29 PM
Thanks to everyone who posted and gave criticism, advice, or anything else. If I came off as an ass, sorry about that; had no intention of being one.

Again, thanks to everyone who has posted. Best of luck y'all.
-Eddie

ericgrau
2009-01-18, 02:53 PM
BL, just duel me already then and show it. Build vs. build or each build vs. a monster. Either way.

Stephen_E
2009-01-18, 02:54 PM
Re: Anti-Power Attack. Elusive Target will make you immune to the extra damage of PA from your Dodge opponent.

One of the big advantages of 2HF vs S&B is when you come across DR without the specific bypass. Suddenly the 50% extra Str dam, higher base damage and better Power Attack really matter. This is especially noticable as low to mid levels (anywhere upto lev 15). I remeber been in a 18th lev party running into a Tarrasque. 3 of us had 2H weapons, one had 1H weapons, and no one had Epic. The PC with 1H weapons was reduced to distracting it while the PCs with 2H weapons blew through it's DR with PA and Reckless Attack (like Shock Tropper but no charge required) from the Warchanter.

As also pointed out boosting your AC doesn't do much unless you also get protection vs magic.

That said if you really want to tank then yes, it can be done with S&B. The trick is Divine Shield, Race choice and Cha effect stacking.
Take a Nixie, +3LA, +8 Cha, +6 Dex, SR 15+class lev. Max out Cha.
Take HexBlade/Blackguard gaining double Cha bonus to saves vs spells, Turn Undead which gives you acess to Divine Shield - Cha bonus to Shield AC, and Mettle - Fort/Will save as evasion for reflex.
Take Monk for Evasion and 5 ranks in tumble - bonus to defensive fighting.

Your AC can now maintain comparative values for opponents "to hit" and you are immune or highly resistant to most magic. As a side benefit your spellcasters love you because between the Hexblade Dark Companion and Blackguard Aura of Despair your opponents take a flat -4 to saves.

Stephen E

Stephen_E
2009-01-18, 03:17 PM
Re: the oft mentioned problem of the enemy ignoring the "Tank" and going for the squish casters. The feat Stand Still combined with Combat Reflexs can stop that. Although to be honest when I've been in parties that tried to do that against the bad guys my experiance was that unless you carefully buily your PC to do it AND carefully pre-cordinated your general tactics the likely result was PC death rather than squishy enemy caster death.

If the DM is actually been highly successful with this tactic it's probably because he's cheating via DM fiat/Deus ex machina. :smallfurious:

I'd also note that I think posters are wildly overstating the ability to "auto hit" on the part of monsters or PCs at anything other than "high" levels (15+). There have been numerous surveys indicating that most players rarely if ever play above lev 15.

Stephen E

Severedevil
2009-01-18, 03:37 PM
If you're not cheesing the game into submission with Shock Trooper/Leap Attack or Animated Shields + Magic Vestment, is S&B viable? (Tripping, at least, takes no penalty from using a one-handed weapon. Although there's no one-handed reach weapon with trip.)

Suedars
2009-01-18, 03:37 PM
I'm currently building a THF Barbarian centered around reach weapons and tripping (Guisarme), focusing on battlefield control more than damage (so no Shock Trooper) and am wondering if I should just dump my AC altogether with what's been said in this thread. At 10th level I can get 23 AC with Chain Shirt+2, a Buckler+1(Poor man's animated shield), a Ring of Protection+1, Gloves of Dexterity+2, and an Amulet of Natural Armor+1. Doing all this however, is taking up several equipment slots and about 1/4 of my starting gold (as well as giving me a -1 to hit from the Buckler). Looking through the MM most fighter-type creatures of CR9-12 will hit me almost all the time (most need 2s or above, with a few needing a 5 or so). When I'm raging it'll be even easier. The only time my AC might come into play is if I'm fighting something that uses Power Attack (which might come up quite frequently as the DM has said that humanoid enemies will be common). So I'm wondering if I'd be better off dumping all the AC boosting gear (except for maybe a Chain Shirt +1, since it's fairly cheap) and buying a few things to boost HP, saves, and my offense instead.

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 03:41 PM
I'm currently building a THF Barbarian centered around reach weapons and tripping (Guisarme), and am wondering if I should just dump my AC altogether with what's been said in this thread. At 10th level I can get 23 AC with Chain Shirt+2, a Buckler+1(Poor man's animated shield), a Ring of Protection+1, Gloves of Dexterity+2, and an Amulet of Natural Armor+1. Doing all this however, is taking up several equipment slots and about 1/4 of my starting gold (as well as giving me a -1 to hit from the Buckler). Looking through the MM most fighter-type creatures of CR9-12 will hit me almost all the time (most need 2s or above, with a few needing a 5 or so). When I'm raging it'll be even easier. The only time my AC might come into play is if I'm fighting something that uses Power Attack (which might come up quite frequently as the DM has said that humanoid enemies will be common). So I'm wondering if I'd be better off dumping all the AC boosting gear (except for maybe a Chain Shirt +1, since it's fairly cheap) and buying a few things to boost HP, saves, and my offense instead.

Barbarian in general blocks things with their massive chest rather than armor (coincidentially, this makes female Barbarians at least as good as males). Give it a go and learn to love your inexistent AC (you can still protect yourself rather effectively with your reach, Guisarme and tripping; just get Enlarged, perhaps a suspendable permanent version if possible to use while adventuring and you'll be fine). Spend the cash on miss chance items instead.

Mushroom Ninja
2009-01-18, 03:45 PM
So I'm wondering if I'd be better off dumping all the AC boosting gear (except for maybe a Chain Shirt +1, since it's fairly cheap) and buying a few things to boost HP, saves, and my offense instead.

I'd be tempted to keep the gloves for more AoO Tripping goodness (assuming you have Combat Reflexes). But other than that, yeah, dump it for more sweet weapon upgrades.

PinkysBrain
2009-01-18, 03:51 PM
Lets ignore animated shields for a moment, cheap tricks are for kids.

A shield is something you should pick up when necessary, fighting giants or other hard hitting melee, use a shield. Fighting anything else, don't.

Mushroom Ninja
2009-01-18, 03:52 PM
Lets ignore animated shields for a moment, cheap tricks are for kids.

A shield is something you should pick up when necessary, fighting giants or other hard hitting melee, use a shield. Fighting anything else, don't.

Assuming that the shield will actually boost your AC by a worth-while amount, I agree.

PinkysBrain
2009-01-18, 03:57 PM
Well if you dipped fighter you have Tower Shield Proficiency, and a tower shield with magic vestment gives decent AC.

Note that though to hit only goes down by 5% per point of AC, DPS goes down a lot faster if you don't start at 100% chance ... 5 points of extra AC at at AC equal to the opponent's AB will cut your average incoming damage down by half.

Flickerdart
2009-01-18, 04:12 PM
Well if you dipped fighter you have Tower Shield Proficiency, and a tower shield with magic vestment gives decent AC.

Note that though to hit only goes down by 5% per point of AC, DPS goes down a lot faster if you don't start at 100% chance ... 5 points of extra AC at at AC equal to the opponent's AB will cut your average incoming damage down by half.
How exactly? If AC=enemy AB (100% hit) and you increase AC 5 points, that's only a 25% increase in their miss chance. Not 50%. Sure, if you increase by 10, you'll be cutting it in two, but it'll cost so much that it would just be cheaper to buy a wizard and use him as a bazooka. Incidentally, your high AC, as mentioned a thousand times before, won't stop Will Save or Die/Lose/Suck, and your Will will be hilariously low. Killing the enemy before they can use it will stop it about as well as you can hope.

PinkysBrain
2009-01-18, 04:16 PM
Oops, should have said AB+10 ...

ChaosDefender24
2009-01-18, 04:17 PM
because of Polymorph, or any of the many other ways to crank your strength up

Dancing shields aside, if you put a +5 enchantment on a shield, that's +7 to AC, +8 if you burned a feat on Extreme Shields


Level 12, the swiftblade draconic polymorphs into a wartroll, for 45 strength if you fist of stone

That's + 17 strength.
That's an extra + 8 damage on each of your 3 attacks... and you should have 3 at this point with haste. Your to-hit is +17 strength, -1 size, +3 GMW, +2 haste, + 9 BAB for +30/+30/+25. Not even going into the abomination that is wraithstrike, that's a lot of room for power attack to increase that figure even more

The choice is clear to me, anyway

Flickerdart
2009-01-18, 04:19 PM
Oops, should have said AB+10 ...
That's generally 40AC by CR20 that you're looking at. Bumping that by 5 is going to be even more expensive, so you'll be able to dual-wield the wizard bazookas instead.

mostlyharmful
2009-01-18, 04:34 PM
If you're not cheesing the game into submission with Shock Trooper/Leap Attack or Animated Shields + Magic Vestment, is S&B viable? (Tripping, at least, takes no penalty from using a one-handed weapon. Although there's no one-handed reach weapon with trip.)

Animated shield and magic vestment aren't even vaguely cheesey.

This isn't to make an unstoppable killing machine, there's plenty of ways to stop a charger dead in it's tracks, just making a Melee focussed PC that does something useful for the team.

Huge amounts of hp damage can be replicated by casters and skillmonkies but it takes up actions and spellslots so let the tank do it, a PC with a huge AC and no damage output in the tank role just falls into the Monk catagory of ignorable until there's nothing else left to smash for most monsters. S&B isn't unviable it's just why are you getting 1/4 of everything, whats your purpose in this team, why do the Druid and the Rogue have to split the gold and the XP with a guy that the monsters are safe to just blank.

Starbuck_II
2009-01-18, 05:11 PM
Barbarian in general blocks things with their massive chest rather than armor (coincidentially, this makes female Barbarians at least as good as males). Give it a go and learn to love your inexistent AC (you can still protect yourself rather effectively with your reach, Guisarme and tripping; just get Enlarged, perhaps a suspendable permanent version if possible to use while adventuring and you'll be fine). Spend the cash on miss chance items instead.

Like Shroud of the Night from Tome of Magic: 10K for 1/day Shadow skin and Dancing Shadows. In addition gives +2 Deflection bonus continally (so you don't need a ring of Protection).
Shadow skin isn't worth it in item form (DR/magic? sucks.), but only because the caster level is too low (if it was caster 10 it would be /silver, etc).
Dancing Shadows can only be seen through with True seeing. It grants you total concealment for 5 rounds.

Yakk
2009-01-18, 07:22 PM
Animated shield and magic vestment aren't even vaguely cheesey.Animated Shield should be a banned item. It was badly designed. As such, it is cheese.

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 07:27 PM
It was badly designed. As such, it is cheese.

So wait, Monk, Fighter, Wizard, Cleric, Barbarian and Ranger are all cheese too because they're badly designed?

Keld Denar
2009-01-18, 07:52 PM
So wait, Monk, Fighter, Wizard, Cleric, Barbarian and Ranger are all cheese too because they're badly designed?

[dev]
AND SO SPAKETH THE GREAT MAKER: LOO, ROGUES, BEING BALANCED IN MY SIGHT, SHALL INHERET THIS WORLD THAT I HATH CREATED.[/dev ]

lulz

Arbitrarity
2009-01-18, 08:04 PM
Monk, Paladin, Fighter, Wizard, Cleric, Druid...

Barbarians, Rangers, Rogues, and Sorcerors. Hm. Sounds like... Unearthed Arcana's generic classes.

Keld Denar
2009-01-18, 08:08 PM
I remember seeing someone's sig a while ago.

The ABCDs of optimization...

Archivist, Beguiler, Cleric, Druid

cource, let out Wizards, but the poll probably felt that it was unfair to rank a professional amongst amateurs...

Yakk
2009-01-18, 08:16 PM
So wait, Monk, Fighter, Wizard, Cleric, Barbarian and Ranger are all cheese too because they're badly designed?
It is badly designed in a cheese way.

It takes an entire option (going 1 H over going 2 H) and throws it out as pretty much useless, regardless of what other impact there is.

Using it on a 2 handed weapon user is "I want to have my cake and eat it too".

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 08:31 PM
It is badly designed in a cheese way.

It takes an entire option (going 1 H over going 2 H) and throws it out as pretty much useless, regardless of what other impact there is.

Meh, it's just undercosted. At +3-+4, it'd be perfectly fair. And even more so if shields were actually, y'know, made useful near the degree that damage is; even if animated shields didn't exist, THF is still better than S&B simply because the shield isn't applicable much of the time. Like, it should be useful against caster enemies and useful for protecting allies. Preferably also useful for protecting allies from caster enemies. Like, if shields automatically added their bonus to touch AC and Reflex-saves (presently you need two feats to pull that off), and if wielded shield could be used to block an attack to an ally (adding the shield's bonus to the ally's AC/Touch AC), or just block an attack (Immediate Action, make an opposed attack roll and if your's is higher, the attack is countered), they'd be on par with THF.

Then it'd just be a matter of making the numbers match (so that they prevent equallish bonuses to defense and offense overall). This'd mean that shields wouldn't help against will-saves and fort-saves, but as long as they'd be sufficiently useful in these other roles, that'd be ok. And there could be some feats/magical abilities that allow you to somehow benefit of shields vs. Fort/Will-save spells. And it would make sense.

ericgrau
2009-01-18, 10:15 PM
Lets ignore animated shields for a moment, cheap tricks are for kids.

A shield is something you should pick up when necessary, fighting giants or other hard hitting melee, use a shield. Fighting anything else, don't.

This. You use them in melee against melee. In fact, who says you even have to pigeonhole yourself to SAB or THF all the time? Pull a Bozzok, wield your longsword or bastard sword or dwarven waraxe in two hands whenever you have a really good opportunity and eat the 2.5/1.5 lost average damage.

But, Eldariel, what you said just made something else click in my mind. Any obstacle - including an ally - provides cover. That gives +4 AC and a +2 bonus to reflex saves. All you have to do is be between the attacking effect and the ally. You can also set down a tower shield to give yourself total cover. That makes you immune to burst effects (provided that the total cover is between you and the burst's origin), but it explicitly allows targetted spells to still hit you if the wizard simply targets your tower shield instead.

Huzzah, now we're cooking with tactics!

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 10:25 PM
But, Eldariel, what you said just made something else click in my mind. Any obstacle - including an ally - provides cover. That gives +4 AC and a +2 bonus to reflex saves. All you have to do is be between the attacking effect and the ally. You can also set down a tower shield to give yourself total cover. That makes you immune to burst effects, but it explicitly allows targetted spells to still hit you, if the wizard simply targets your tower shield instead.

You need some means to be there though. You cannot move as an immediate action, and the Wizard can move before casting whatever spell. Also, enemies only provide soft cover and thus you can only block attacks (I suppose they should apply to touch attack rolls though). What I'm envisioning is protecting your allies while going about your business of hitting people in the face. Arrow going past you? Immediate action Shield Block; No moar arrow! Ray being targeted past you? Shield Block! Hopefully you manage to block the touch spell. Much of this stupidity is really a consequence of how clumsy the movement modelling of 3.5 is. Since you can't step in front of your opponents or anything, walking past people is damn easy, and since you can only run on your own turn, catching people is damn easy. Bleh.

Knaight
2009-01-18, 10:32 PM
Barring crits, I would gain 23.64% damage at the cost of 26.67% AC.

You just answered your own question. The damage is nearly as high as the AC loss, and when people are throwing around stuff that isn't targeting AC the best defense against them is to just kill them so as to deny them further attacks. Lets be charitable and say 50% of attacks target AC. Thus you gain 23.64% damage at the cost of 13.345% more attacks going through. Seeing as damage helps prevent attacks from targeting you in the first place(since the enemies are dead) you are now 10.295% ahead. This is without power attack, which adds more to this, and without considering how the wealth splitting affects things.

ericgrau
2009-01-18, 10:40 PM
You need some means to be there though. You cannot move as an immediate action, and the Wizard can move before casting whatever spell. Also, enemies only provide soft cover and thus you can only block attacks (I suppose they should apply to touch attack rolls though). What I'm envisioning is protecting your allies while going about your business of hitting people in the face. Arrow going past you? Immediate action Shield Block; No moar arrow! Ray being targeted past you? Shield Block! Hopefully you manage to block the touch spell. Much of this stupidity is really a consequence of how clumsy the movement modelling of 3.5 is. Since you can't step in front of your opponents or anything, walking past people is damn easy, and since you can only run on your own turn, catching people is damn easy. Bleh.

Hmm, good point. Though it only works in rooms more than 15 feet wide and/or areas w/o other cover as well. If you want, maybe you could house rule that anyone with a shield can, at his option, provide cover not just in his own squares, but also the squares around him. Probably as an immediate action like you said. But I dunno if this is going too far or not. I mean, I'd still want it to be beatable under certain circumstances. And even in the existing way I've seen tons of times when the front actively blocked the back. Via AoO, cover or both, from their position and the surrounding terrain/structures. I'd have to look at some scenarios for the house rule.

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 10:59 PM
Hmm, good point. Though it only works in rooms more than 15 feet wide and/or areas w/o other cover as well. If you want, maybe you could house rule that anyone with a shield can, at his option, provide cover not just in his own squares, but also the squares around him. Probably as an immediate action like you said. But I dunno if this is going too far or not. I mean, I'd still want it to be beatable under certain circumstances. And even in the existing way I've seen tons of times when the front actively blocked the back. Via AoO, cover or both, from their position and the surrounding terrain/structures. I'd have to look at some scenarios for the house rule.

Well, it shouldn't be a problem since it's just a bonus to the defense, not auto-success, so the opponent can still succeed through it. Just, the difference is that right now, the Fighter is contributing to the defense, while previously he was not. As a bonus, having Shields apply to Touch AC would hit another point so omnipresent in D&D; globally inexistent Touch AC making certain spells ridiculously powerful (Shivering Touch, I'm looking at you).

It'd also give people a very real incentive to use a shield, and thus pushing a trained warrior with a weapon, a shield, an armor and the skill to wield them beyond the mere beast with its natural strength and thick skin in endurance as it should be.

zakk2to2
2009-01-18, 11:00 PM
high ac is just fine but what it comes down to is while yes you can have a stratospheric ac it just takes one good crit to kill you or something and the more they attack you the greater the chance. the faster you can get the opponent dead the less damage you take. remember you only 50 points of damage and a failed save away from death but so are they. kill them before they get a chance and guess what the cleric wont need to heal you.

Signmaker
2009-01-18, 11:49 PM
As a bonus, having Shields apply to Touch AC would hit another point so omnipresent in D&D; globally inexistent Touch AC making certain spells ridiculously powerful (Shivering Touch, I'm looking at you).

Shield Ward? Also applies to several vs. Special Attack rolls.

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 11:50 PM
Shield Ward? Also applies to several vs. Special Attack rolls.

I've been saying that should be the default. Shield Ward costs you two feats, something you don't want to be paying just to get mileage out of the thing on your second hand.

Signmaker
2009-01-18, 11:52 PM
I've been saying that should be the default. Shield Ward costs you two feats, something you don't want to be paying just to get mileage out of the thing on your second hand.

True, but having Shields naturally apply to Touch AC would be difficult to explain. For elemental-based touch attacks, it makes sense that said element (be it electricity or sheer coldness) would bypass a metal pan. Hm..

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 11:55 PM
True, but having Shields naturally apply to Touch AC would be difficult to explain. For elemental-based touch attacks, it makes sense that said element (be it electricity or sheer coldness) would bypass a metal pan. Hm..

Blocking the effect makes all kinds of sense though. Besides, just getting the feat "Shield Ward" doesn't make any more sense. If it's really such an issue with realism (my opinion always was that if something doesn't make sense with magic, just change your perception of magic a bit), make only magical shields work (since that's what PCs beyond level 3 will be using anyways; a +1 shield is only 1000 - that would make them relatively ineffective for armies though which is similarly ridiculous when I'd imagine the best chance to survive a fireball without going modern warfare and remaking all settings and towers and everything is a phalanx as it's only momentary heat and then dissipates).

LurkerInPlayground
2009-01-18, 11:57 PM
In 4e, it's arguably the other way around.
Because being able to connect blows at all is king?

Or more specifically, making it harder for your enemies to connect their blows is king?

Waspinator
2009-01-19, 04:29 AM
"Sword and board" works pretty well with Tome of Battle characters because they use their maneuvers for a lot of their damage.