Discussion: Improving S&B

[Borror0]

I guess I just don't see this need to be one or the other WHEN YOU CAN BE BOTH .

That's a very silly argument.

Why would you be both? One fetch more AC and more DPS. The other is S&B, which now should stand for Shift and Bored and only serves for Shield DR.

EDIT: Woot! Ninja'd myself.

[Borror0]

+4 AC.. In a territory where it matters a BUNCH. thats gettin hit 20% less there....

Impaqt, you have enough knowledge to understand that to get more DPS you need to sacrifice survivability and to get more survivability you need to decrease your DPS. So what if that paladin can get a tiny bit more AC? (First of all, that paladin doesn't have monk levels and that would put him higher than S&B, but let's ignore this for now.) That paladin can dish out much more damage than he would in S&B. It's around twice more and gets it so little less.

How can you say it's balanced?

Also, that build can be improved by monk levels too!

[Angelus_dead]

I guess I just don't see this need to be one or the other WHEN YOU CAN BE BOTH .

Fine, if you want to look at it that way, then ask a rearranged question:
Assuming you do have both TWF and S&B, why would you ever use S&B?

I have many characters fitting that description, and the answer is: NEVER. The only times I use a shield are if I'm going to block with it and stall for time (such as waiting for a heal, or waiting for someone else to fight the monster instead of me, or whatever). That's not "Sword And Board", because I'm not actually attacking with the weapon in my hand (just using it for the Insight AC bonus).

The fact is that right now in DDO, if I see a high-level character attacking with a shield on his arm, I know that he's basically messing up. Maybe he's not making a mistake right now- maybe his only error is that he doesn't have enough weapons to TWF, or that he designed his character back in the old days when a Tower shield was the way to have high AC. But from the perspective of how the game system works today, he's doing it wrong.

S&B combat deserves better than to be the fallback combat style for those who lack the gear or stats to go TWF.

[Turial]

10 base
9 Dex
7 Armor (white dragon robe + ritual)
2 Dodge (chaos guard)
5 Protection
3 Dodge (chattering ring)
1 Dodge (feat)
4 Insight (tier 3 item)
_______
41 Unbuffed

5 Barkskin
1 Haste
4 Shield
_______
51 Self Buffed

5 Paladin Aura
2 Recitation
4 Bard Song
_______
62 AC Raid buffed

+2 if I had Rainments (I have +6 ac bracers)
+7 if I took a level of monk
_______
71 AC Uber equipment and multiclass

[Reisz]

Please detail out how these builds are hittin their "Greater AC than S&B" and then lets talk some more. Every example of a High AC TWF Build I've seen has sacrificed something significant to get there.

Bottom line is these kinds of builds sacrifice a LOT for uber ac. anyone who thinks differently is kidding themselves.

An argument without examples is pointless.

I have to respectfully disagree. I have a pure human fighter level 16 spec'ed for S&B. After reviewing the numbers. A multi-class TWF is better in every aspect except blocking DR. Which is why I am currently leveling a rgr/pal/mnk.

Please give us an EXAMPLE of the sacrifices in which you speak. I feel that my S&B fighter has had to make more sacrifices than my TWF.

[Reisz]

Fine, if you want to look at it that way, then ask a rearranged question:
Assuming you do have both TWF and S&B, why would you ever use S&B?

My TWF is on timer....

But seriously, blocking DR is huge. I know that any TWF can use a shield if he wants to turtle. But a properly spec'ed S&B has about 10 more points of DR. That can make a big difference.

[Borror0]

[...] a properly spec'ed S&B has about 10 more points of DR.

Nope. He has between 0 to 9 DR. Zero to six, if he's not a Dwarf.

[Reisz]

Nope. He has between 0 to 9 DR. Zero to six, if he's not a Dwarf.

Borror, I am trying to be on your side, but you have to play fair. If you are comparing a S&B without SM and ISM, you have to comparing a TWF without ITWF and GTWF.

So for the sake of this argument 6-9 DR and it still adds up. Assuming they have nearly the same AC, S&B usually have a few more HP than the TWF counter part. The S&B can take about 50-100% more hits before needing to heal.

(assume TWF has 350 hp 25DR, S&B has 400 HP and 31 DR, Mob averages 45 HP per swing)

[Angelus_dead]

But seriously, blocking DR is huge. I know that any TWF can use a shield if he wants to turtle. But a properly spec'ed S&B has about 10 more points of DR.

Once again, that's a discussion on Turtling, not Fighting.

Being good at Turtling isn't enough to recommend S&B as a Fighting style... if it were actually even good at Turtling, which is debatable. A TWF monk/ranger will have a lot more AC, but not as much DR. Depending on the enemy either might be better (but I would usually prefer the 80+ AC guy, who also has a stronger healing multiplier)

That does raise an interesting question though: What is the peak TWF blocking DR? My monk doesn't have enough constitution for me to check.

[Angelus_dead]

Borror, I am trying to be on your side, but you have to play fair. If you are comparing a S&B without SM and ISM, you have to comparing a TWF without ITWF and GTWF.

No, really you don't. ISM is only hardly ever useful, while GTWF is almost always useful. One is a Turtling feat and one is a Fighting feat. As already explained several times now, Turtling and Fighting are separate activities.

That is a bug: the DDO devs had intended for shield-blocking to be something you did actively in the middle of combat, instead of being an alternate long-term mode. But, it didn't turn out that way, and the main use for blocking is to get some aggro and Turtle (Note: the module 7 reduction in Intimidate cooldown made fulltime Turtling more common).

TWF is far better at fighting, and sometimes better at Turtling too. But S&B (and THF) should be a defensible choice even when not Turtling.

[Reisz]

Once again, that's a discussion on Turtling, not Fighting.

Totally lost me here. This is about melee combat, being effective, and helping the entire party. How does controlling mob and taking less damage while doing it, not meet that criteria?

if it were actually even good at Turtling, which is debatable.

Look at my number posted above. 50-100% more hits before needing a heal.

Being good at Turtling isn't enough to recommend S&B as a Fighting style...

This is true. Shield blocking should add more AC and DR than it currently does in the game. And even if it did, that may still not be enough reason to play S&B. Lets face it, when you sign up for S&B you are signing up for less damage and more defense, period. (turbine should probably work on the more defense part though)

[Borror0]

Borror, I am trying to be on your side, but you have to play fair. If you are comparing a S&B without SM and ISM, you have to comparing a TWF without ITWF and GTWF.

My build has Shield Mastery and Dwarven Shield Mastery II. That +5 DR, not +9... and I'm a (dwarven) fighter!!

That's not comparable, because that DR is not worth the sacrifice. GTWF is. Heck, it's even free to rangers.

Once again, that's a discussion on Turtling, not Fighting.

True and well said.

That does raise an interesting question though: What is the peak TWF blocking DR?

You mean the top TWF DR? If not switching to a shield it's:
Passive DR + [(BAB / 3) + 2 + Two-weapon Blocking Feat]
Passive DR + 5 + 2 + 2

Versus:
Passive DR + [(BAB / 2) + 2 + Shield DR rating (now includes Shield Enhancement) + Shield Mastery Feats + Shield Mastery Enhancements]
Passive DR + 8 + 2 + 15 + 6 + 3

So, discarding passive DR, it's 9 versus 34 if that was your question.

[Mithran]

I thought the dexterity builds had higher A/C's than S&B, anyway. Maybe I'm misremembering what I'd read from the rulebooks, back when I was REALLY familiar with them, but that's back from about 1984.

[Angelus_dead]

Look at my number posted above. 50-100% more hits before needing a heal.

It's not the number of hits that matters, but the number of attacks. The TWF turtle has much more AC, so he is hit less in the same amount of time. And then, because of his monk levels, when it comes time to heal a single spell fills him right up.

[Angelus_dead]

Totally lost me here. This is about melee combat, being effective, and helping the entire party. How does controlling mob and taking less damage while doing it, not meet that criteria?

Because of the inherent limitation both on the applicability of Turtling and the number of players required to execute it.

Turtling simply isn't enough of a justification for S&B's viability to depend on... just like Stunning Blow isn't enough to justify Improved Unarmed Strike. Do I really need to spell out why?

If your position is that S&B is only valuable for Turtling, then you've already given up on it being valuable for Fighting. The design goal should be that if you're auto-attacking on a level-appropriate ogre, S&B should have markedly better survivability than TWF or THF (TWF should only be able to meet/exceed S&B AC if the character truly has dex and wis as his highest scores, meaning his sacrifice was real).

By the nature of initiative, a player character can almost always find something to attack, but will not always be under attack by something. Therefore styles with a defensive advantage (if S&B even qualified) need to be relatively better to keep up with offensive-focused ones.

Consider what happens if you're soloing a quest instead of doing it with a normal party: in that situation, 100% of monster aggro is always on you, so your defenses are frequently tested. But add members so you get towards a regular group and there are more targets for monster aggro, so you need to defend less even though you can attack nearly as much. This shows us that a defensive style is relatively more useful when soloing than it is otherwise. With that in mind, the ideal result would be that nearly every martial character would prefer to change to a defensive style when he's got to kill some monsters by himself. That's a nice goalpost to watch when deciding if S&B is "good enough" yet.

[Angelus_dead]

So, discarding passive DR, it's 9 versus 34 if that was your question.

I don't see a number for Greater Mountain Stance on there... not only does it provide passive DR/-, but also a bonus to blocking. Maybe it's only +3, but I hadn't felt like searching.

[Borror0]

I don't see a number for Greater Mountain Stance on there... not only does it provide passive DR/-, but also a bonus to blocking. Maybe it's only +3, but I hadn't felt like searching.

It's +6 DR and +2 when blocking. So, you can add an extra +8 DR.

[Borror0]

Lets face it, when you sign up for S&B you are signing up for less damage and more defense, period.

Yes, and that fine with all of us.

The problem, is that that DPS sacrifice should be balanced for whatever defense gain you get. It currently is not.

[Reisz]

TWF is far better at fighting, and sometimes better at Turtling too.

It is better at causing damage, yes, it should be. No it is never better at blocking.

Look I am really on your guys' side. TWF, THF and S&B were not really that far out of balance. But the dev's continue to make stupid decision. By that I mean they add an item, enhancement, etc... that greatly benefits one style and does not help the others. I will quote the imbalanced items that need to be atoned for:

Crit Rage
Tempest
Icy Raiments
Lorrik's Champion

If you take away just those 4 things, voila...balance.

[eonfreon]

That's a very silly argument.

Why would you be both? One fetch more AC and more DPS. The other is S&B, which now should stand for Shift and Bored and only serves for Shield DR.

Are you serious?
Obviously all you're really fixated on is the Monk.
Because taking away the Tempest AC will take away 2 points of AC so that can't be the game-breaker.
So again I have to ask what is this S&B Shield Specialist Build that has the Dexterity of a TWF but decides not to spend the feats on TWF?
The THF Build? Costs 3 Feats: THF, ITHF & GTHF
The S&B Build? Costs 2 Feats: SM & ISM
The TWF Build? Costs 3 Feats: TWF, ITWF & GTWF
The AC minded? Costs 3 or maybe 4 Feats: CE, Dodge & TWD and maybe Mobility for the Tumble AC.
The DPS and Weapons Effects Minded? Costs 6 Feats: Khophesh, PA, Improved Crits: Slashing & Piercing, Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization of their choice.
The Hit Point Minded? Costs 1 Feat: Toughness
That's 19 Feats or 18 if you skip Mobility (Does anyone really need it unless they want Spring Attack or want to go Tempest?). A 16th Level Human Fighter has 16, all others have 15.

So my argument isn't that the current game needs to be revised, it's that we need more Feats.
The current game is just fine.
Other than your obsession with Monks I don't see a problem.
Unless you want more Feats. And no one has ever argued against that.
What I argue against is that the game mechanics have to somehow change to add to the "fun" of being an exclusive S&B Fighter.
So yes, by all means add more Feats.
And a Respec option already exists if new Feats are added. Just farm Dragon Shard Fragments, create Dragon Shards, take them to Fred and exchange the Feats. Wait 3 days and repeat until you have all the Feats exchanged you want.
The only Respec I would see needed is if the new Feats have Stat Requirements that an existing build might not be able to get.
As for AC.
If they make 70 AC the number needed (just as an example, personally I think it should be higher, perhaps as high as 75 AC for Hard and 80 for Elite Raid EndBosses) to be missed on all but a 20, then a 60 AC still won't get hit on anything but 10 or higher. And everything over 70 is just overkill. Much like the Barbarian with supposedly 800 hit points when 400-500 is perfectly survivable for a no AC Barbarian, 250-300 for a Ranger, and 300-400 for a Fighter.
And any decent well-built Tank can achieve a 60 AC, especially with buffs.
My Strength-based Dwarf Ranger/Fighter can achieve 57 with self-buffs and a shield(-2 when they finally fix Tempest working with shield)- so a 55 when they fix Tempest.

Base +10
Breastplate of Destruction with Arcane Ritual +11 Or any MBP with Arcane Ritual
Dexterity +7
Dodge +1
Chaos Guards +2
Protection +5 Necklace +5
Combat Expertise +5
Barkskin +5
+5 Shield with Arcane Ritual +8
Haste +1
Tempest Bug +2 Until it's fixed
----
57/55 without Tempest
So if 70 = 20 or 95% AC
Then my self-buffed 55 AC = 5 or 20% AC
Due to the Tempest Bug I have a 57 AC = 7 or 30% AC
So yes, I would be hit a lot by Endgame Raid Bosses. But if I was trying to Tank without additional Buffs from my GROUP, I would deserve to be.
Especially since any group worth it's salt, especially a Raid Group, would be able to increase my AC to at least 65 (plus a Blur and a Displacement for as long as that lasts). The Blur alone means I should be missed 20% of the time.
So Self-Buffed and Group Buffed 65 AC = 15 or a 70% AC
The Player Abilities aren't the Problem.
The Future Game trying to compensate for those ridiculous 80 AC MetaGame builds would be the problem.
Since the current Endgame came out at the same time as the Monk the AC/DPS Ranger/Monk build, since it obviously wasn't intended (I figure the Devs realized the Monk AC was through the roof, but figured his low DPS would compensate. He wouldn't get hit much if at all, but he wouldn't do much damage), DID NOT EXIST YET.
So the current endgame doesn't reflect that and is NOT BROKEN.
My Low AC High Hit Point guy has to rely on his 476 Hit Points and Blur from his Caster Buddy for an 20% AC and that Won't Change No Matter What Difficulty I'm On.
Now Obviously the Hound isn't intended to hit only an 80 AC on a 20- except maybe on Elite.
Because if it was my 65 Fully-Buffed AC would be HIT ON NEARLY EVERY SINGLE SWING.
Now unless the Hound is rolling a "1-4" a lot or unable to get through the Blur's 20% or the Displacement's 50%, or all of the above, then his To-Hit is not +80 or above.
+70 to +75?
Quite probably.
Just for Schnits and Giggles: Some day I'll go into the Hound by myself and see how quick I'll die just with my 55/57 AC while shield blocking.
And if you find it "unfun" to play alongside that Ranger/Monk, then don't accept him into your PUGS, and don't join groups with him in it.
Problem solved.
To ask the Devs to rework the mechanics of the game just so Borro can have fun playing his S&B at EndGame is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
You say you can reach 65 fully buffed AC.
Do you expect me to believe that every thing can hit you on a "2"?
I run around the Vale and Vale Elite Quests with a 48 Dual Wielding Self-Buffed AC (49 if I feel like drinking a Haste Pot or am playing with a Caster Buddy). Even against Orthons (although against them it might be more my twitch Skills then anything else).
And unless I'm one of the luckiest men alive (or the beneficiary of fortunate vagaries of chance, for Branmakmuffin if you're still out there) and all mobs are rolling "1's", then 80 AC is NOT NECESSARY.
And I'm not always blurred.
Running around the Vale I can do it all Solo.
The quests, particularly Coalescence Chamber, are full of debuffing mobs, so often I'm without Barkskin, Blur, Haste or anything else besides my unbuffable items and CE.
Changing the mechanics to be more like PnP with decreasing attack, instead of increasing would help make S&B matter, by penalizing the last hits of a TWF, especially one with CE or PA or who might foolishly have them both turned on.
Not allowing an attack chain to reset until the full swings are completed regardless of moving (so that you have to deak with the lower attack bonus and the movement penalty- making Spring Attack more desirable for anyone other than a Tempest Ranger) or a time delay has occurred might help to prevent the Swing and Move scenario.
So until new Feats are added, if you wish to keep playing your has-the-Dex-to-also-TWF S&B Build, exclusively S&B, then keep doing so.
And exclude all other builds in your groups so that you don't feel overshadowed.
And spare me the silly arguments.