Fighter Kensai Preview

[EinarMal]

And that, my friend, is you once more shooting off your big mouth and making a complete ass of yourself again.

Haven't you finished embarrassing yourself yet?

Get over yourself kid. You made made a statement that was wrong before, that's all. No one died. No one got hurt. No one cares but you. If you're upset, go cry to mamma, stop throwing **** at me in your childish frustration.

BUT back to Tempest. LIKE I SAID errors are going to be there.

So right now it's +1 hit/+5 damage not the +3/+5 I thought? But that'll be +1/+6 at lvl 20 right?

I'll edit that in there now, with the +14 damage from FE.

*EDIT DONE*

Makes you just sit back and go *boggle* that they added in STWF for Rangers only.

I agree that for fighters the only thing they do better than anyone is have very high to hit with focus+kensai+high strength. The problem with that is if they actually make that useful then Rogues are totally screwed. It is hard to balance the game so that the extra hit matters for top end fighters yet people with possibly 10-15 or more less to hit can still actually do anything.

For my money I still say for melee classes when you combine looking at all factors including, DPS, AC, self healing, etc... my mod9 power rankings are....

Ranger
.
.
.
Paladin
Barbarian
Fighter

[maddmatt70]

Makes you just sit back and go *boggle* that they added in STWF for Rangers only.

For my money I still say for melee classes when you combine looking at all factors including, DPS, AC, self healing, etc... my mod9 power rankings are....

Ranger
.
.
.
Paladin
Barbarian
Fighter

I think there is a question as to what will be the future content. In the shroud I care a little bit about evasion if I am doing a shroud speed record attempt, but otherwise I don't care about defense at all as long as the melee char has over 300 hit points. I personally would factor DPS as number one and wouldn't care at all about self-healing and very little about ac for shroud content. For a VOD or Hound AC matters a little especially for 1 member of the group in VOD.

[sephiroth1084]

Makes you just sit back and go *boggle* that they added in STWF for Rangers only.

I agree that for fighters the only thing they do better than anyone is have very high to hit with focus+kensai+high strength. The problem with that is if they actually make that useful then Rogues are totally screwed. It is hard to balance the game so that the extra hit matters for top end fighters yet people with possibly 10-15 or more less to hit can still actually do anything.

And there's the rub... PnP was balanced under the assumption (at least partly) that rogues would hit a lot harder than fighters, but would do so less often. Yet, from what I've read, 3/4 BAB classes were too frustrated with the high AC monsters, so Turbine readjusted everything's AC down, which put even level 17 raid bosses in the "hit on a 2" range for many characters. One problem is the prevalence of buffs that get tossed out...it becomes too difficult to balance things when the difference between an unbuffed group and a buffed group can be as much as ~13 points to hit.

I think we should start going up against monsters that a fighter can hit about 80-95% of the time when buffed with GH, Haste and an assumed further +2 from something else.

[Angelus_dead]

And there's the rub... PnP was balanced

PnP was not balanced.

Yet, from what I've read, 3/4 BAB classes were too frustrated with the high AC monsters, so Turbine readjusted everything's AC down

The ones who were frustrated were anyone without Fighter Attack Boost or Paladin Attack Boost (which included both barbs and rangers).

[binnsr]

The ones who were frustrated were anyone without Fighter Attack Boost or Paladin Attack Boost (which included both barbs and rangers).

It was just worse for the poor 3/4 BAB folks trying to attack anything..

I still remember running Tempest Spine on my capped (@10) rogue and praying for a 20 so I could hit something.

[EinarMal]

And there's the rub... PnP was balanced under the assumption (at least partly) that rogues would hit a lot harder than fighters, but would do so less often. Yet, from what I've read, 3/4 BAB classes were too frustrated with the high AC monsters, so Turbine readjusted everything's AC down, which put even level 17 raid bosses in the "hit on a 2" range for many characters. One problem is the prevalence of buffs that get tossed out...it becomes too difficult to balance things when the difference between an unbuffed group and a buffed group can be as much as ~13 points to hit.

I think we should start going up against monsters that a fighter can hit about 80-95% of the time when buffed with GH, Haste and an assumed further +2 from something else.

Well yeah but in PnP you could actually kill something as a Rogue with a couple of shots. If you did that in this game Rogues would be totally useless. That is going to be tough as Fighters will have a very high to hit. You are talking about +45 or so to hit on the first swing with power attack ON and power surge active.

[sephiroth1084]

PnP was not balanced.

That is out of context.

The ones who were frustrated were anyone without Fighter Attack Boost or Paladin Attack Boost (which included both barbs and rangers).

And I said, "from what I've read," because I was not playing DDO at that period and so am only tangentially familiar with that situation.

Well yeah but in PnP you could actually kill something as a Rogue with a couple of shots. If you did that in this game Rogues would be totally useless. That is going to be tough as Fighters will have a very high to hit. You are talking about +45 or so to hit on the first swing with power attack ON and power surge active.

My post was off a bit...but something should be done to balance things there a bit. Rogues should be doing a lot more damage than fighters (and possibly more than barbarians or rangers or paladins also), but should have a harder time landing their attacks.

In PnP it wasn't that much more difficult for a rogue to hit than it was for a fighter, but the fighter wasn't hitting on a 2 all the time and a rogue wasn't getting sneak attack all the time. Also, you drastically underestimate the amount of HP some monsters have. DDO messes things up a bit by having situations where most martial characters are hitting on a 2, even with multiple penalties being applied to their attacks, while the monsters have too much HP for characters to progress in a quest when landing attacks less than 80% or so of the time.

Despite this, Turbine seems to think that abilities that boost the fighter's attack bonus are somehow attractive. Maybe we'll see some content with high-AC monsters akin to the drow of the Tempest Spine of old, and the Kensai attack bonuses will come into play. I doubt it, though, and I'm not sure I'd want to play if monster AC is being balanced against Kensai Fighters' to-hit.

[bobbryan2]

And there's the rub... PnP was balanced under the assumption (at least partly) that rogues would hit a lot harder than fighters, but would do so less often. Yet, from what I've read, 3/4 BAB classes were too frustrated with the high AC monsters, so Turbine readjusted everything's AC down, which put even level 17 raid bosses in the "hit on a 2" range for many characters. One problem is the prevalence of buffs that get tossed out...it becomes too difficult to balance things when the difference between an unbuffed group and a buffed group can be as much as ~13 points to hit.

I think we should start going up against monsters that a fighter can hit about 80-95% of the time when buffed with GH, Haste and an assumed further +2 from something else.

I don't think that's an accurate depiction of what happened.

Yes... 3/4 BAB were frustrated they couldn't hit high AC numbers. Yes, Turbine readjusted everything. But the inaccurate part was that it was the right thing to do. Turbine didn't do it because everyone was complaining, Turbine did it because it needed to be done.

Lvl 10 Fighter vs Lvl 10 rogue.

The fighter starts off 3 BAB higher than the Rogue. Then he got an additional +3(I think) from Fighter Attack III. Then he got an extra attack the rogue didn't at +5. Then he got Fighter Strength III, which was potentially another +2.

So the Fighter is sitting at +13 vs the rogue, with the same starting stats and level ups. PnP was balanced assuming the Fighter was +3 ahead of the Rogue, not +13.

And when you say a Fighter should hit 80-90%... what do you mean? Do you mean overall? Ultimately meaning he has no chance of missing on +5 or +10 attacks, of which 60% of his attack chain is? Overall? Meaning the first couple swings are dreadful to hit... which ends up that a moving fighter can't attack well even with spring attack?

It works right now.. and it works fine for what it does.

[sephiroth1084]

I don't think that's an accurate depiction of what happened.

Yes... 3/4 BAB were frustrated they couldn't hit high AC numbers. Yes, Turbine readjusted everything. But the inaccurate part was that it was the right thing to do. Turbine didn't do it because everyone was complaining, Turbine did it because it needed to be done.

Lvl 10 Fighter vs Lvl 10 rogue.

The fighter starts off 3 BAB higher than the Rogue. Then he got an additional +3(I think) from Fighter Attack III. Then he got an extra attack the rogue didn't at +5. Then he got Fighter Strength III, which was potentially another +2.

So the Fighter is sitting at +13 vs the rogue, with the same starting stats and level ups. PnP was balanced assuming the Fighter was +3 ahead of the Rogue, not +13.

If the rogue has Weapon Finesse that difference shrinks (Dex III enhancement with possible Dex II from race, and a further potential boost to starting Dex from race).

Anyway, it seems to me that the enhancement system is causing as many problems as its fixing.

And when you say a Fighter should hit 80-90%... what do you mean? Do you mean overall? Ultimately meaning he has no chance of missing on +5 or +10 attacks, of which 60% of his attack chain is? Overall? Meaning the first couple swings are dreadful to hit... which ends up that a moving fighter can't attack well even with spring attack?

It works right now.. and it works fine for what it does.

I admit, I had not thought that out, but my intent was that some monsters (more than a few, but fewer than most) should have an AC high enough that even fighters are missing on more than a 2 on occasion.

I honestly don't think it is working well, since, when I post a query regarding archery, everyone responds saying that Shot on the Run is completely useless due to being able to hit on a 2+ even when running, and when no one considers turning Power Attack off after a certain point because the penalty just doesn't matter, and when there are players who don't bother taking Oversized TWF because they are still hitting consistently even with the penalties from a non-light off-handed weapon, TWF and PA. Heck, my drow wizard that started with an 8 Str can whip out a Dreamspitter and beatdown on trogs in the Shroud a bit (with a couple buffs I was hitting trogs on something like a 5). Why even bothering to give the monsters AC?

At early levels, every now and then you'd get into a quest and find out you were in over your head when you'd go up against a named boss or optional and discover that you weren't hitting except on a 20 (end boss in SC for example), and you'd suddenly start having to drink every pot in your inventory trying to get your attack bonus higher and increase your defenses enough to survive his onslaught while you tried to dink away at him. We no longer have that at higher levels. We instead have these structured combats, where some people stand and deliver and others help to enable them in doing so, and there isn't even a question as to whether or not someone in the group is going to be able to hit the pit fiend or not. If I were Arretrikos's lord, I'd kill him myself for his weakness! Little halflings with toothpicks can find their way through his armor! Some general.

[Monkey_Archer]

Even if they do add high ac mobs in mod 9+ they probably wont change existing mobs ac....
So if a fighter can get approx +10 to hit, and add +10 from buffs...
For about a +20 fully buffed fighter to actually be worth it, doesnt this mean that an unbuffed anything-else cant hit ANYTHING????????

Hence the problem with attack bonuses at high levels already...

Oh.. and not to go into details about what is wrong with that kensai,tempest,FB comparison.... first thing i noticed right off the start was that tempest (for some reason) had -4 to hit for dual weilding... assuming everything else was correct (i didnt check) that woudl move that AC mark up by 4 (at least)....

[Monkey_Archer]

Well according to the devs they are upping glancing blow special effect attacks in the next mod and there undoubtedly will be some changes to the current attack motion/sequence; i.e., the developers are working on balancing twf and thf. I have a q-staff rogue I am leveling up and I figure I also have option of swapping my fighter or paladin to thf if I want to (just not really my ranger).

While i like that they are working on THF, even if glancing blows could crit, and added effects 100% of the time THF still coulnt beat TWF..

At low levels, TWF attacks 50% faster has -2 to hit and benefits equally from stregth and/or power attack, and weapon effects/buffs are minimal.. which basically balances out...
At high levels TWF attacks 100% faster and benefits double from all feats, bard buffs, and weapon effects.

If changes to attack sequence bring this back to 50% faster, THF might actually be comparable.. but probably still alot worse...
Since doubling bard buffs for THF is never gonna happen the least that could be done is double the weapon specialization feats/enhancments

[Cold_Stele]

Oh.. and not to go into details about what is wrong with that kensai,tempest,FB comparison.... first thing i noticed right off the start was that tempest (for some reason) had -4 to hit for dual weilding... assuming everything else was correct (i didnt check) that woudl move that AC mark up by 4 (at least)....

Good catch - I'll edit later.

If you see any more let me know.

[bobbryan2]

While i like that they are working on THF, even if glancing blows could crit, and added effects 100% of the time THF still coulnt beat TWF..

Are you sure about that?

[nbhs275]

While i like that they are working on THF, even if glancing blows could crit, and added effects 100% of the time THF still coulnt beat TWF..

At low levels, TWF attacks 50% faster has -2 to hit and benefits equally from stregth and/or power attack, and weapon effects/buffs are minimal.. which basically balances out...
At high levels TWF attacks 100% faster and benefits double from all feats, bard buffs, and weapon effects.

If changes to attack sequence bring this back to 50% faster, THF might actually be comparable.. but probably still alot worse...
Since doubling bard buffs for THF is never gonna happen the least that could be done is double the weapon specialization feats/enhancments

if glancing blows applied effects 100% of the time, it would mean that every swing a barbarian makes with a 2hander deals 18d6 damage on his main target, and 9d6 on any others nearby.

[Monkey_Archer]

if glancing blows applied effects 100% of the time, it would mean that every swing a barbarian makes with a 2hander deals 18d6 damage on his main target, and 9d6 on any others nearby.

Every hit does not produce glancing blows.... 2 every 5 attacks do... or 2 in 4 if you keep moving...
where does a barbarian get 18d6 btw?

[Monkey_Archer]

Are you sure about that?

Yes... im sure Cold stele wouldnt mind proving that... try running any 2 handed weapon against dual khopesh and you will see my point.

A single khopesh crits for more then a greatsword, (or twice as often as a greataxe)... and with full buffs only does maybe 20% less damage

[BlackSteel]

At low levels, TWF attacks 50% faster has -2 to hit and benefits equally from stregth and/or power attack, and weapon effects/buffs are minimal.. which basically balances out...
At high levels TWF attacks 100% faster and benefits double from all feats, bard buffs, and weapon effects.

PA and STR bonus do not equal out, b/c TWF is not double the amount of attacks

[BlackSteel]

Yes... im sure Cold stele wouldnt mind proving that... try running any 2 handed weapon against dual khopesh and you will see my point.

A single khopesh crits for more then a greatsword, (or twice as often as a greataxe)... and with full buffs only does maybe 20% less damage

fully buffed WF THF can get a regular hit in the 80s and 90s, add on elemental dice, and glancing blows, and you're talking roughly 135 on a single swing. So you're saying a one handed weapon can do 100+ damage on a noncrit? (rogues excluded). With FB, you're talking 200+ on a single swing noncrit; or 180/190 average noncrit damage.

[Desteria]

fully buffed WF THF can get a regular hit in the 80s and 90s, add on elemental dice, and glancing blows, and you're talking roughly 135 on a single swing. So you're saying a one handed weapon can do 100+ damage on a noncrit? (rogues excluded). With FB, you're talking 200+ on a single swing noncrit; or 180/190 average noncrit damage.

yes ....

Anni my ranger VERs harry normaly sees the following:

53 base
+8 SA *1/2 for his fort +4
+1 force
+7 holy
=65 damage thats NONE crit swings * 2 weapons = 130 damage one swing

[Monkey_Archer]

fully buffed WF THF can get a regular hit in the 80s and 90s, add on elemental dice, and glancing blows, and you're talking roughly 135 on a single swing. So you're saying a one handed weapon can do 100+ damage on a noncrit? (rogues excluded). With FB, you're talking 200+ on a single swing noncrit; or 180/190 average noncrit damage.

I'd like to see the numbers for a 90 damage hit...
Oh and what elemental damage can average + 45 damage on top of that...
Oh and which part of +6 str and 6d6 vicious damage adds 65 on top of that...

power attack (non-WF) does 10 for 2-handed 5 for each weapon... which is 10 for both..
str bonus counts 1.5 for 2handed , 1.0 for main hand 0.5 for offhand... which is 1.5 for both..

all other buffs count double for 2-weapons...