Discussion: Improving S&B

[Angelus_dead]

But are you arguing for more DPS or more defense?

He wasn't advocating for a specific fix- this thread was to look at a variety of suggestions. However, it was derailed by various persons who denied that there even is anything that needs fixing.

[Reisz]

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.

But are you arguing for more DPS or more defense?

[Borror0]

But are you arguing for more DPS or more defense?

If you were to ask me, I'd say both.

Obviously, S&B should be more defensive than offensive spec'd, but increasing its DPS decreases the need for greater defensive abilities and creates a much healthier balance.

[Angelus_dead]

Why?
How is it a Combat Style? Other than for "those who lack the gear or stats to go TWF".
You pick up a shield. That's it.

Because when you think 'Fantasy heros going to fight giants, dragons, and orcs', people holding shields are one viable choice for a heroic role.

D&D is supposed to be a generic fantasy roleplaying game, meaning it should support the typical fantasy archetypes. A guy with a shield is part of that- or should be.

[eonfreon]

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.

Why?
How is it a Combat Style? Other than for "those who lack the gear or stats to go TWF".
You pick up a shield. That's it.
Then you take Feats to boost your DR. That's it.
Your iconic picture of Dirk the Daring goes right to that.
If you ever played the game at the arcade, you would have to admit that he's a Dex Build (at least a 14 starting Dex).
He's not wearing Plate Armor. At best it's Chainmail, but really it looks like a Chain Shirt.
He uses the shield for blocking. And obviously it's an Epic Raid Shield with great DR, Fire Resist, and Protection.
Obviously the shield's so good that it's worth not pulling out his offhand weapon, especially while protecting the Princess.
Either that or he's still looking for his +3 Dex Tome.
Look at Aragon from LOTR.
Is he not a Dex-based TWF Ranger?
Does he ever pull out a shield to do more than block?
And if they implement a Shield as a TWF weapon Feat (like Gladiator or 300) would it not also need a High Dex Stat? Or is it just Strength?
I'm really asking.
I know nothing about 3.5 D&D. I played AD&D until about 1990. Feats didn't even exist back then.
I am definently not against adding Shield Fighting Feats, especially if they exist in PnP.

[Angelus_dead]

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

No. There's more to "blocking" than just maximized DR. There's also AC, and to a lesser extent saves, evasion, and healing factor. TWF wins on all those other factors.

Depending on the extact combat stats of the monster attacking you, it might be more important to have more AC or more DR.

[Borror0]

eonfreon, the post #100 is so long, confusing and poorly constructed that I have the feeling to be hearing one of Palin's speech.

Reword it, rework and I will reply. You got to be more concise and structured. In its current form, I don't get what you're saying. Sorry about that.

[Angelus_dead]

eonfreon, the post #100 is so long, confusing and poorly constructed that I have the feeling to be hearing one of Palin's speech.

Lol, how can you know that? I thought Palin hadn't given any internationally-publicized speeches yet...

[Borror0]

Lol, how can you know that? I thought Palin hadn't given any internationally-publicized speeches yet...

I follow American politics a little. You're our neighbour. Whoever you're going to have up there is going to affect us.

[Angelus_dead]

Obviously, S&B should be more defensive than offensive spec'd, but increasing its DPS decreases the need for greater defensive abilities and creates a much healthier balance.

One reasonable (but unpopular) way to do that would actually be to reduce the offense of TWF, by cutting it from 10 to 9 attacks per full cycle.

That would relatively increase the offensive power of both S&B and THF, and mean that S&B needs fewer defensive increases to become balanced.

[Borror0]

One reasonable (but unpopular) way to do that would actually be to reduce the offense of TWF, by cutting it from 10 to 9 attacks per full cycle.

I'm not too much in favor of that, and I don't think I need to elaborate as to why since you already know it's unpopular.

[Angelus_dead]

I follow American politics a little. You're our neighbour. Whoever you're going to have up there is going to affect us.

It doesn't matter where you are. I was commenting on the fact that after her selection appearance, Palin has hardly given a real speech or given the public much chance to hear her talk.

Anyway, I have a suspicion that some forum rule prohibits political matters as off-topic. It's a good way to distract people from whatever you'd like to accomplish.

[Borror0]

Anyway, I have a suspicion that some forum rule prohibits political matters as off-topic.

Yeah, #12. But, saying that Palin's speeches was hard to follow is as political as saying that this speech is hard to follow, IMO of course.

[Reisz]

No. There's more to "blocking" than just maximized DR. There's also AC, and to a lesser extent saves, evasion, and healing factor. TWF wins on all those other factors.

Depending on the extact combat stats of the monster attacking you, it might be more important to have more AC or more DR.

I don't agree. Those things are not based on TWF. Please compare apples to apples. A S&B can have evasion, good saves, and healing factor. Don't confuse S&B with a pure 16th level fighter.

Blocking is solely about the DR. If my DR did not go up significantly, I would never block....ever.

But getting back to my point about the fighting styles being balanced. I quoted 4 things that hideously tip the scales away from S&B. They are all based on things the dev's have absolute control of, namely Unique items and enhancements.

Crit Rage - seriously stupid thing for the dev to implement. How does a murderous frenzy lend to precision and accuracy?

Tempest - Best of both worlds, more attack and defense. Tempest II will probably be /god mode

Icy Raiment's - Adding insult to injury.

Lorrik's Champion - Now any schmuck can block with the same DR as the poor S&B who needs a tower shield. Why not add a Short Sword that gives GTWF and 10% melee alacrity

[Angelus_dead]

Lorrik's Champion - Now any schmuck can block with the same DR as the poor S&B who needs a tower shield. Why not add a Short Sword that gives GTWF and 10% melee alacrity

A light weapon granting some of the TWF feats would be a fine idea, since it would prevent the user from using an actually powerful offhand weapon (like a vorpal or green steel)

[Borror0]

Blocking is solely about the DR. If my DR did not go up significantly, I would never block....ever.

A_D's point was that, in avoiding damage, DR is not the only factor. AC, Evasion and high saves are also a factor to take into account.
It's easier for TwF to get Evasion, by far, and TwF also dominate the AC field.

And... if S&B is all about blocking, then, it should really be renamed Shift and Bored because it's going to be pretty **** boring.

[eonfreon]

A_D's point was that, in avoiding damage, DR is not the only factor. AC, Evasion and high saves are also a factor to take into account.
It's easier for TwF to get Evasion, by far, and TwF also dominate the AC field.

And... if S&B is all about blocking, then, it should really be renamed Shift and Bored because it's going to be pretty **** boring.

Yes, it's incredibly tough to splash 2 levels of Rogue or 2 Levels of Monk.
The "S&B with the Dex to be TWF" has his AC beaten by:
Tempest Ranger TWF by 2 points.
The Monk Tempest Ranger by up to 10 points.
If they give my Ranger Toughness Enhancements like a Fighter, I'll gladly trade my 2 AC advantage.

[Angelus_dead]

Yes, it's incredibly tough to splash 2 levels of Rogue or 2 Levels of Monk.

Hi. Tower shields disable evasion.

How that happens is: Tower shields impose a max dex, meaning that you can't have a high dex bonus with them and have to make up the difference by wearing mithral fullplate. Mith fp is medium armor, and evasion only works in light armor.

[eonfreon]

eonfreon, the post #100 is so long, confusing and poorly constructed that I have the feeling to be hearing one of Palin's speech.

Reword it, rework and I will reply. You got to be more concise and structured. In its current form, I don't get what you're saying. Sorry about that.

Sigh.
Fine, I'll reword it just for you Borro.
And I'll break it down to Topics.
First:
You asked why would you do both, if you had the stats to be both S&B and TWF.
To which I replied; because you have the FEATS if you're a 16th Level Fighter.
Or you can go S&B, TWF, and/or even THF if you want.
Human Fighter = 16 Feats
All Other Fighters = 15 Feats

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

The basic cost for grabbing the S&B, TWF, and even THF Feats all together = 8
Leaving either 7 or 8 Feats to do with as you want.
I'm not including Tactics Fighters because that's a whole other topic.

As the the Game Currently Exists, not as a (supposed) Iconic Image of Heavily Armored Shielded Warriors (and for every example of this Iconic Character I can show his TWF counterpart, such as Aragon for example), why do you believe a S&B is a Specialist Fighting Style (or should be), rather than, as I believe, a replacement Fighting Style for someone who either does not have the gear or stats to be TWF, or as a Defensive DR Blocking Style as it currently is?

Why should Feats be added to make it a Fighting Style?
A_D's example of Shielded Knights and Warriors (who have traditionally been protrayed as Paladins with Gods, Spirits, and Angels at there side far more than incredible shield wielders) aside.
Game-wise.
I have no problems adding Feats. But what Nerfs do you want specifically, because you keep saying that nerfs might be needed.

[Angelus_dead]

As the the Game Currently Exists, not as a (supposed) Iconic Image of Heavily Armored Shielded Warriors (and for every example of this Iconic Character I can show his TWF counterpart, such as Aragon for example), why do you believe a S&B is a Specialist Fighting Style (or should be), rather than, as I believe, a replacement Fighting Style for someone who either does not have the gear or stats to be TWF, or as a Defensive DR Blocking Style as it currently is?

Okay, that gets to an important and fundamental question which I think most people are agreed on:
Should S&B be a "good" style, or should it be a fallback style for those characters who don't care enough about melee to be effective at it?

The answer is that S&B should be a viable choice for a dedicated melee combatant to increase both variety and verisimilitude.