Fighter-Cleric, can't decide stat placements

[Hollysword]

So I'm starting a 3.5 campaign, I plan to be some kind of Human Fighter/Cleric (mostly fighter) and I expect to be the face of the party. The campaign allows 28 point buy, and at first I set my stats to be the following:

STR 15, DEX 12, CON 12, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 14

But then I realized that the feats I planned to get requires 13 DEX, so I need to reduce one of the other stats to gain the DEX. My two options I can think of are:

STR 14, DEX 14, CON 12, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 14
OR
STR 15, DEX 13, CON 12, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 13

Which option would be better for me, or is there another better option?

[GilesTheCleric]

Do you have a build planned, or perhaps a build stub?

[Crake]

Do you have a build planned, or perhaps a build stub?

Pretty much this, we can't really help you if you don't give us an idea of what you want to get out of the build. If you're going cleric and want to be able to cast anything above 2nd level, you'll also want to get some higher wisdom there.

[Hollysword]

I planned to start with Dodge and Mobility to start with, then the usual Cleave and Power Attack, then finally Leap Attack from Complete Adventurer. Once I get Leap Attack, I plan to get a couple levels in Cleric for some side healing. My main weapon would be Spear type weapons. Holy Dragoon is in.

[GilesTheCleric]

I planned to start with Dodge and Mobility to start with, then the usual Cleave and Power Attack, then finally Leap Attack from Complete Adventurer. Once I get Leap Attack, I plan to get a couple levels in Cleric for some side healing. My main weapon would be Spear type weapons. Holy Dragoon is in.

I don't think cleric is going to serve the intended goal of your build here the way you describe it. If you plan to stick to melee combat, investing in a Healing Belt (MIC) and/ or a wand of CLW/ lesser vigour (SC)/ faith healing (SC) might be more efficient use of your resources. Now, if you want to use cleric in a melee build, that's still very possible, but I'd recommend going straight cleric if that's your intent.

[Crake]

I planned to start with Dodge and Mobility to start with, then the usual Cleave and Power Attack, then finally Leap Attack from Complete Adventurer. Once I get Leap Attack, I plan to get a couple levels in Cleric for some side healing. My main weapon would be Spear type weapons. Holy Dragoon is in.

For healing, a couple of levels of cleric, especially by the levels you qualify for leap attack, would be practically useless. In combat your healing would be too weak to really make an impact, and out of combat you'd be better off using a wand of cure light wounds or lesser vigor (a wand of lesser vigor heals 550hp for it's 750gp cost, being quite possibly one of the most efficient healing items in the game). Now don't get me wrong, a single level of cleric is a great dip for practically any build, but casting that is so significantly behind the curve is rather useless. If you wanted to go a "holy warrior" kind of character, a straight cleric is more than capable of achieving that for you, or alternatively, building a paladin-type character.

If you want to go a "leaping warrior" kind of character however, you might be more interested in playing a warblade using tiger claw maneuvers (some of which give you bonuses if you can achieve certain jump check DCs) or, if you want a holy character feel, crusader, and pick up some tiger claw maneuvers/stances using feats.

[Hollysword]

Do clerics get enough feats to be a leaping warrior fast? I don't think my character can be a paladin because of his lawful neutral alignment.

Also, what book is the crusader in?

[GilesTheCleric]

Do clerics get enough feats to be a leaping warrior fast? I don't think my character can be a paladin because of his lawful neutral alignment.

Also, what book is the crusader in?

Leap Attack requires 8 ranks in jump, so they get it just as fast as a fighter. If you're human, you can take Cosmopolitan (FRCS) or Apprentice (DMG2) and Power Attack at level 1. There's options for non-LG paladins in UA (eg. Paladin of Freedom is CG). Crusader is in Tome of Battle.

Edit: There's also the Knight class in PHB2 which only requires L.

[Troacctid]

You can get plenty of bonus feats as a cleric by taking the Ordained Champion prestige class. It gives you a bonus domain, then allows you to replace your domain powers with bonus feats. It also has many other excellent abilities, and makes for a fantastic divine fighter build. I highly recommend it.

A good build is Cleric or Cloistered Cleric 4/Ordained Champion 5/Fist of Raziel or Knight of the Raven 10.

Dodge and Mobility are useless feats, so you can just skip them and you won't actually need 13 Dex.

[Hollysword]

I should've posted this earlier, my mistake. My idea: A Holy Dragoon (fighter/cleric with leap) with a monastic background (explains Dodge and Mobility).

[Troacctid]

You can have a monastic background without taking useless feats. I could understand if they added monk-themed gameplay elements to your character, but they don't actually do anything, so you might as well just not take them in the first place.

A better "background" feat would be Apprentice (Martial Artist).

If you want to go deep on monk flavor, you could also take Sacred Fist, which is a Cleric/Monk hybrid class.

[Hollysword]

No need to get too deep. Just that he came from a monastic background, but not so much that he's actually a monk himself. He has a couple of monk skills and feats, but not so monk-y that he has monk special abilities.

Also, how does Mobility 'do nothing'? I understand that Dodge giving +1 AC against one opponent may be a bit small, but Mobility seems decent for someone who likes to jump around.

[weckar]

Mobility is quite easily beaten by having a decent tumble check for 9 out of 10 cases. If you really want it, you're probably better off getting it as an armor enhancement.

[Darrin]

Also, how does Mobility 'do nothing'?

On this forum, Dodge and Mobility are known mostly as useless "feat taxes" or "feat traps". At least among regular forum posters, they frequently are reviled for being under-powered and mostly useless. But they are frequently prerequisites for other feats or Prestige Classes (hence the "tax" you must pay to get more interesting stuff).

The +1 AC provided by Dodge is too weak to provide much of a difference in a game where AC progresses very, very slowly compared to attack bonuses. In the course of actual play, you are going to forget you even have the bonus more often than you actually use it to prevent an attack from hitting. It's also not considered a very good feat because the benefit it provides doesn't scale as you level up. At early levels, it might be slightly useful in a game where a single attack roll from a goblin can kill you. At higher levels, it's barely worth remembering you took it.

If you want a feat that boosts your AC, there are better options. Law Devotion (Complete Champion) offers a better AC bonus that scales up. It's 1/day, but much more likely to save your bacon in a tough fight than a +1 you keep forgetting you have. Shape Soulmeld: Wormtail Belt (Magic of Incarnum) gives a +2 natural armor bonus that works all the time against all opponents, but to use it you often have to explain how soulmelds work to the DM, which is not exactly an easy task.

As far as Mobility goes, putting ranks in Tumble makes it obsolete. And you can get Tumble as a class skill for fighters pretty easily. In the Cityscape Web Enhancement, there's an ACF (Alternate Class Feature) called "Skilled City-Dweller" that lets you swap your Ride skill for Tumble. A 6th-level Fighter (the level you can pick up Leap Attack) with 9 ranks in Tumble, 5 ranks in Jump, and a 14 Dex has a +13 bonus on Tumble checks. This means he can tumble through a threatened square (DC 15) 95% of the time. At 7th level, he can do this 100% of the time, at which point for the rest of his career Mobility is dead weight, taking up a feat slot that could have been used for something you actually use every round/encounter/etc.

Hopefully the point we're trying to make here is this:

You can dig through obscure sourcebooks to amass a bunch of mechanical options that make your character tactically superior in a wider variety of situations.

You can make the character's fluff and backstory interesting and compelling.

You can also do both. These two goals are not at odds with each other!

So you want a fighter with a "lived with some monks" background... taking the Skilled City-Dweller ACF to explain his tumbling skills (the monastery was near a large city if need be) does this just as well as taking Dodge and Mobility, but without saddling your fighter with two nearly useless feats that can be better spent on something else. A fighter doesn't have any other class features, he lives and dies by his feats, so you don't want to load him down with dead weight that's going to close off more interesting options in the future.

[Hollysword]

I find it interesting that everyone views Dodge and Mobility as useless skills, but in the supplements they tend to recommend Dodge and Mobility for monks. Why is that?

[John Longarrow]

Monk tends to be a poor mechanical choice for an unarmed combatant. People who recommend feats for monks generally don't pay attention to just how well/poor those feats work in game. Combat Expertise and weapon focus (unarmed strike) are far better feats for a monk.

That said making an initiator (the classes from Tome of battle) and taking improved Unarmed Strike/Superior Unarmed Strike will give you a much better unarmed combatant than a Monk.

[Darrin]

I find it interesting that everyone views Dodge and Mobility as useless skills, but in the supplements they tend to recommend Dodge and Mobility for monks. Why is that?

Monks are horrendously misunderstood by most players and particularly by WotC designers. Every week or so, someone posts a "Why does everyone hate monks?" thread, and a few minutes later the thread is 50 pages long with everyone repeatedly explaining to nobody who wants to listen why exactly the monk is such a class design disaster. We call this "Monkday" (instead of Monday).

In a Core campaign, Dodge/Mobility might have a place because the very few feats that are useful and worthwhile dry up quickly, and then you have to fill your feat slots with *something*. And the bonus feats that monks do get as class features are some of the more terrible ones: Stunning Fist is too difficult to use and has a horrendously high failure rate when you do manage to use it, Deflect Arrows is barely useful even when you are in one of those rare situations where you're actually being shot at with arrows, and while Improved Grapple is one of the better ones, the grappling rules themselves are a bit of a Timecube rabbit-hole.

As far as sourcebook advice goes, it's been somewhat long established that the WotC playtesters didn't really understand the deeper structural problems with the system rules, didn't pay much attention to character optimization, and often deliberately played in a style that was not particularly effective. For example, it's been widely reported that whoever was playtesting the druid never bothered to use Wild Shape. Ever. The wizard players focused on "blasting" rather than battlefield control. Clerics did the healbot thing and not much else. And while that isn't particularly a *wrong* way to play (and you could argue that's how the game was intended to be played), there are other playing styles that the system rules tend to favor in a very lopsided way.

Or, to put it more succinctly... WotC made the somewhat obvious mistake of not letting Emperor Tippy write their sourcebooks.

[Hollysword]

But for the extreme roleplayers who want actual monk (or at least a monastic background, like my character) would still use monk, instead of just going full optimal fist-fighting-fighter, right? Game isn't about choosing optimal picks for killing machines, game is about building character, whether for better or worse. I'm still thinking of using Dodge and Mobility, because that's what my character would have.

My original question though, which stat I should drop in favor of DEX, seems to be completely forgotten under everyone trying to give me optimal ways to make my character. A Holy Dragoon type character, should I drop my STR or my CHA in favor of DEX?

[sleepyphoenixx]

But for the extreme roleplayers who want actual monk (or at least a monastic background, like my character) would still use monk, instead of just going full optimal fist-fighting-fighter, right? Game isn't about choosing optimal picks for killing machines, game is about building character, whether for better or worse. I'm still thinking of using Dodge and Mobility, because that's what my character would have.

Your characters mechanics don't necessarily have anything to do with your roleplaying choices. You can be a monk without your character sheet saying "Monk" anywhere on it.
In-character nobody knows what's on your character sheet.

Chances are you can even be a better monk that way, because while fluff is mutable it's hard to play as a master of the unarmed fighting arts if you're not actually good at fighting unarmed. Which monks generally aren't.
From the fluff perspective there's little difference between a character with the Monk class who is fighting unarmed and a character who is build to do well as an unarmed/unarmored fighter. One is just better at it than the other, but if both grew up in a monastery and learned there they're both "Monks" to Joe NPC.

Choose what your character is supposed to have gained from his time in the monastery and then pick options that effectively represent that mechanically, no matter what they're called.
Dodge doesn't really do anything, so since nobody in-game can see your charsheet your character hasn't actually learned anything, or so it would seem at least.
It doesn't matter what the mechanics descriptive text says - if it doesn't actually do what it claims to do it won't really help your RP either, as i said above. If your backstory says you're good at something you should actually be good at it.

My original question though, which stat I should drop in favor of DEX, seems to be completely forgotten under everyone trying to give me optimal ways to make my character. A Holy Dragoon type character, should I drop my STR or my CHA in favor of DEX?

Drop charisma. It doesn't do anything for you. Strength at least adds to your damage.

[Darrin]

But for the extreme roleplayers who want actual monk (or at least a monastic background, like my character) would still use monk, instead of just going full optimal fist-fighting-fighter, right?

Extreme roleplayers may be in the same room as everyone else, but they are playing a completely different game.

Game isn't about choosing optimal picks for killing machines, game is about building character, whether for better or worse.

You're still insisting on a false dilemma, that "character development" and "mechanical optimization" are at odds with one another. On CharOp boards, this is generally referred to as the Stormwind Fallacy.

The danger with insisting that character development must take precedence over mechanics is you wind up frustrated with a character that isn't contributing to the story because mechanically you made design choices that don't contribute anything useful to the party. But that's not really going to lead to a discussion with any kind of meaningful resolution.

I'm still thinking of using Dodge and Mobility, because that's what my character would have.

Good. If you're happy with that, then I'll stop whining about the Stormwind Fallacy.

My original question though, which stat I should drop in favor of DEX, seems to be completely forgotten under everyone trying to give me optimal ways to make my character. A Holy Dragoon type character, should I drop my STR or my CHA in favor of DEX?

STR 14, DEX 14, CON 12, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 14

This is the best array of stats. If you take the other one:

STR 15, DEX 13, CON 12, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 13

You'll want to "even out" the odd-numbered stats so you get better bonuses. That means at 4th, 8th, and 12th level, you'll be raising Str to 16, Dex to 14, and Cha to 14. But it will take 12 levels to do that. With the top array, it only takes 8 levels to do that, by increasing Str at 4th and 8th:

STR 16, DEX 14, CON 12, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 14

So start with the top one:

STR 14, DEX 14, CON 12, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 14

Drop charisma. It doesn't do anything for you. Strength at least adds to your damage.

OP said this char will likely be the party face, so Cha is somewhat useful there. However, in the grand scheme of things, how many skill ranks you put in Diplomacy is going to be more important than whether you have a +1 or +2 from Charisma.

[Red Fel]

Another point: If you're intent on going with Dodge and Mobility, you might consider the strictly superior Desert Wind Dodge from Tome of Battle. It does require knowledge of one Desert Wind maneuver, but is far more functional, granting a blanket +1 AC (as opposed to +1 AC against a designated target) and +1 Fire damage whenever you move 10 feet. Since you're playing a mobile character, you'll be moving a lot, making this effective. Additionally, it counts as Dodge for qualification purposes.

But yeah. As everyone else has said.

It sounds like the issue you're facing is the challenge in distinguishing background fluff from mechanical crunch. Let me explain. There's a difference between saying, "My character was trained monastically, and is therefore agile and evasive," and saying, "My character has the Dodge and Mobility feats." There's a difference between saying, "My character was trained in the martial arts, and therefore has studied unarmed combat," and saying, "My character has levels in Monk."

The difference is that the former are statements of fluff, which can be explained with any number of mechanics, while the latter are statements of crunch.

Let me give you an illustration. You want your character to demonstrate evasion and mobility? Watch me do it with a Barbarian. Get a Barbarian with two ACFs. First, the Whirling Frenzy ACF from Unearthed Arcana replaces your usual Rage with Whirling Frenzy, which gives you a Str bonus, a dodge bonus to AC, a bonus to Reflex saves, and allows you to make an extra attack at your highest BAB, at the cost of -2 to all attack rolls that round. Next, the Spirit Lion Totem ACF from Complete Champion replaces your Fast Movement ability with Pounce, which allows you to make a full attack on a charge.

There you have it. A combatant who goes into - let's call it a "battle trance," but it functions like a Rage - becoming more evasive, more elusive, able to spring into battle quickly and unleash a flurry of strikes on his enemy. Functionally superior to a Monk, too.

See what I mean? And there's more. This only takes a couple of levels of Barbarian. After that, you can straight-up go into Fighter if you want to. Or Warblade or Crusader, which I think fit your image a lot more. (Seriously, if you want monastically-trained warrior, you really need to check out Tome of Battle.)

My point, which others have also stated, is that what you need to define is the end-goal - "I want my character to be able to do this" - in non-mechanical terms. Then you can find the mechanics that let you do that effectively. And then you can apply your backstory to the concept and flesh it out into a proper character.

[ExLibrisMortis]

This thread has some very nice posts on character design. Commendations to the posters, and to the OP; not everyone reacts so politely when exposed to optimization.

On the topic of mechanics, it is worth nothing that Tome of Battle has some very practical entry-level feats, particularly Martial Study. The feat grants you one 'maneuver' (once-per-encounter power), and a class skill associated with that maneuver. Available bonus class skills include Diplomacy (White Raven), Tumble (Desert Wind), Intimidate (Devoted Spirit), and Jump (Tiger Claw), all of which are practical for your build, depending on which way you go. You can take the feat three times, and it's even a fighter bonus feat, so keep that in mind.

On the topic of fighters and skills, note that they don't have many skill points, and your intelligence is not high. I think you'll want 5 ranks Jump, Bluff, and Sense Motive, and then as high as possible in Tumble and Diplomacy, and possibly some Intimidate, Spellcraft, Concentration etcetera, depending on how much you're going to cast in combat. That would go well with 4-5 skill points per level. If that sounds reasonable, Tome of Battle classes have more skill points than fighters and clerics (4, 6, and 4 per level, respectively), as do cloistered clerics and Sacred Fists.

[rrwoods]

Swordsage (unarmed variant) is also an excellent choice for a "monk" -- the fluff out-of-the-box already fits.

Another alternative if you're insistent on Dodge is Expeditious Dodge (can't remember source right now). It gives you a +2 dodge bonus to AC as long as you've moved 40 or more feet this round, and can substitute for Dodge as a prerequisite.

[John Longarrow]

As party face you will be better off reducing your CHA and bumping up your INT. More skill points means you can do the job better.

STR 14, DEX 10, CON 14, INT 14, WIS 14, CHA 10

may serve you better in the long run. With Fighter and Cleric, my guess is your looking to wear armor. Dex is useful, but with two skill point starved classes you'll want the bonus skill points to be able to pull off diplomacy. Unless you need more turning attempts the +2 from being naturally charismatic won't be as the extra 8 skill points at first level. Higher wisdom lets you cast more spells and helps with perception based skills (such as sense motive) that you normally won't have as class skills.

To be a decent party face you not only need to be diplomatic, you need to be able to tell when people are trying to deceive you.

End of the day, the big question is what should your character be able to do based on both how you want to play your character and the in game background for that character. Too often if you stress character "Class" over character background and personality, you get caught up in this "I'm a fighter" RPing trap rather than actually playing "Inigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die".

NOTE: As an individual who does get into the Role play more than the ROLL play, I've found most of the class structures limiting for RP.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

If you REALLY want to be agile and evasive, combine Evasive Reflexes (Tome of Battle), and Karmic Strike (Complete Adventurer) -- along with Combat Reflexes because it makes everything better.

Now, whenever someone successfully hits your AC in melee, you gain an attack of opportunity against them. And since AoOs are taken BEFORE the action that provoked them, you get your AoO before their attack succeeds. And since Evasive Reflexes allows you to 5' step out of the way instead of making an actual attack...

There's plenty of good stuff you can combine this with later on, such as the sparring dummy of the master (Arms & Equipment Guide p137). Now you can take 10' steps, and since it's reusable, feel free to make an argument about selling it at full price to a shaolin-type temple, as it's still just as valuable as when you bought it. And furthermore, there's a stance in Tome of Battle that allows you to take two 5' (or in this case, two 10') steps, so now you're moving 20' every time anyone attacks you. And with all of THAT, there's a feat (Opportunistic Tactician) that gives you a 5' step (now two 10' steps) after you make a regular AoO, so you don't even have to sacrifice your attack. Added to that, there's everything from Improved Trip to Knock Down to Snap Kick to Double-Hit to increase your number of attacks on AoOs (as well as on regular attacks, in many cases).

Doesn't that sound a lot more like "master of attacks and evasion" than getting +1 to AC against one enemy and +4 while moving?

[sleepyphoenixx]

Now, whenever someone successfully hits your AC in melee, you gain an attack of opportunity against them. And since AoOs are taken BEFORE the action that provoked them, you get your AoO before their attack succeeds. And since Evasive Reflexes allows you to 5' step out of the way instead of making an actual attack...

Karmic Strike only grants you an AoO if your opponent hits you in melee. You're probably thinking of Robilar's Gambit (PHB2), but that specifically resolves the AoO after the attack.
There's also Hold the Line (CW) which could do what you want, but that one only works against charges.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Karmic Strike only grants you an AoO if your opponent hits you in melee. You're probably thinking of Robilar's Gambit (PHB2), but that specifically resolves the AoO after the attack.
There's also Hold the Line (CW) which could do what you want, but that one only works against charges.

You get an AoO if it gets a successful attack roll, but you make the AoO before it actually gets to perform the action. Stepping out of the way (or Knockbacking or disarming) can actually interrupt the action, just like making an AoO on someone stepping out of a space prevents them from actually stepping out of that space, even though that's what provoked the AoO.

It's the exact same situation, just with a different trigger.

[sleepyphoenixx]

You get an AoO if it gets a successful attack roll, but you make the AoO before it actually gets to perform the action. Stepping out of the way (or Knockbacking or disarming) can actually interrupt the action, just like making an AoO on someone stepping out of a space prevents them from actually stepping out of that space, even though that's what provoked the AoO.

It's the exact same situation, just with a different trigger.

You can't use the AoO that you get for being hit to avoid being hit. That's ridiculous.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

You can't use the AoO that you get for being hit to avoid being hit. That's ridiculous.

Then how can you use the AoO that you get for someone moving out of a space if they don't move out of their space due to a trip attack? That's equally ridiculous, and yet it's totally possible.

It's the distraction that the attempt at an action produces, rather than the result itself, that allows for AoOs.

[edit] You couldn't get an AoO on anyone attempting to cast a spell that fizzles when you hit them, either, because they didn't cast the spell that provoked the AoO that made them fizzle. Yet that's totally a thing, too.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Then how can you use the AoO that you get for someone moving out of a space if they don't move out of their space due to a trip attack? That's equally ridiculous, and yet it's totally possible.

It's the distraction that the attempt at an action produces, rather than the result itself, that allows for AoOs.

[edit] You couldn't get an AoO on anyone attempting to cast a spell that fizzles when you hit them, either, because they didn't cast the spell that provoked the AoO that made them fizzle. Yet that's totally a thing, too.

Except that unlike normal AoOs Karmic Strike specifies a successful attack, not just an attempt.
You don't get the AoO for the opponent attacking you, you get it for being hit. The attack is already done at that point.