Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 50
  1. #1
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default Fighter: Stalwart Defender PRE is horrible

    I'm not sure on where to beging to address this as the level of terrible is hard to properly put into words.

    Long of the short:

    - it costs over 40 AP to get the abilities we have now on live.
    - Stance requiring a shield is just terrible, even if it is intended to prevent exploits in splash builds.
    - It's weak and lousy compared to what you can get by splashing monk.

    Quick and dirty solutions:

    - lower the AP costs. not perfect but maybe if we have enough points to invest in the pretty nice Kensai tree it'll lower the pain of this PRE being terrible
    - Remove the shield requirement. If the concern for having this is the unintended synergies with splash builds FIX THE BROKEN SPLASH OPTIONS.
    - I'm not sure there is a quick-n-dirty solution for this. Defender builds biggest advantage over offensive builds defensively is Armor Class. Armor Class is the LEAST IMPORTANT LAYER in a layered-defense when you get to EE. As long as this is the case Defender builds will be a big bucket of meh. Closest thing I can come up with is a bunch of PRR and threat. As it is now my 18/2 Evasion stalwart WITH ARMOR AND SHIELD cannot get the same PRR as a monk-splashed kensai with Earhstance 4 and Defensive strikes and that is beyond broken.

    Better solution: Put a disclaimer on the PRE letting new players know it's horrible.

  2. #2
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Is this still terrible? Are the shield+Stance requirement still there breaking the PRE? Is it still insanely expensive to buy anything in this tree?

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teh_Troll View Post
    Is this still terrible? Are the shield+Stance requirement still there breaking the PRE? Is it still insanely expensive to buy anything in this tree?
    In an upcoming Lamannia patch, you should see some changes to this tree, including:
    - Most of the low-tier enhancements no longer require a shield. Many of the higher-tier ones still do, however. (This is also true about the Sacred Defender tree).
    - Many of the enhancements have had their AP costs reduced, removing ~30 AP in total costs from the tree. (Sacred Defender has similarly had its costs reduced).

  4. #4
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steelstar View Post
    In an upcoming Lamannia patch, you should see some changes to this tree, including:
    - Most of the low-tier enhancements no longer require a shield. Many of the higher-tier ones still do, however. (This is also true about the Sacred Defender tree).
    - Many of the enhancements have had their AP costs reduced, removing ~30 AP in total costs from the tree. (Sacred Defender has similarly had its costs reduced).
    Thank you. If the SD stuff is cheap enough you might be able to marry it with enough Kensainess to be strong, will test this out tonight.

    Still not too happy about the shield being required for stance benefits of STR and CON. Remember that stance block rage-effects and rage is now +5 STR/CON because of primal scream. If that stance doesn't have those STR/CON benefits it's just kinda pointless.

    99% of the time a shield just isn't needed, this kinda pigeon-holing is silly.

  5. #5
    2015 DDO Players Council B0ltdrag0n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    830

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steelstar View Post
    In an upcoming Lamannia patch, you should see some changes to this tree, including:
    - Most of the low-tier enhancements no longer require a shield. Many of the higher-tier ones still do, however. (This is also true about the Sacred Defender tree).
    - Many of the enhancements have had their AP costs reduced, removing ~30 AP in total costs from the tree. (Sacred Defender has similarly had its costs reduced).
    Neither of the effects in either class tree should require a shield at all. I say if you want it limited limit it to THF and sword and board.
    Officer of Renowned

  6. #6
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B0ltdrag0n View Post
    Neither of the effects in either class tree should require a shield at all. I say if you want it limited limit it to THF and sword and board.
    If you need to enforce some stuff working with a shield and some not . . . reverse what you did. Since rage is +5 STR/CON there's no point in being in stance when DPSing as a TWFer/THFer.

    Lower upgrades do not require a shield to be equipped:

    Resilient Defense: While in Stalwart Defense, you gain a +3 Competence bonus to all Saving Throws.
    Durable Defense: While in Stalwart Defense, you gain a +15 Competence bonus to Physical Resistance Rating.
    Inciting Defense: While in Stalwart Defense, you gain a 75% Competence bonus to melee threat generation.

    Higher upgrades require a shield:

    Strong Defense: While wielding a shield in Stalwart Defense, you gain a +6 Competence bonus to Strength.
    Hardy Defense: While wielding a shield in Stalwart Defense, you gain a +6 Competence bonus to Constitution.
    Tenacious Defense: While wielding a shield in Stalwart Defense,

  7. #7
    Hero nibel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    3,471

    Default

    While I agree that Stalwarts should do more than just tanking, I can't see why you would like to heavily invest on the tanking tree if you want to mainly NOT tank. You can go up the tree without investing on the stance upgrades for desirable effects, and every core ability past the stance requires a shield, or involves +threat stuff.

    If your tank is in a quest where tankiness is not required, turn the stance off and benefit from your primal screams at will. It is not like the stance give you any extra damage at all.
    Main: Amossa d'Cannith, Sarlona, casually trying Completionist [<o>]

    Almost-never-played-alts: Arquera - Chapolin - Fabber - Herweg - Mecanico - Tenma

    I want DDO to be a better game. Those are my personal suggestions on: Ammunition, Archmage, Combat Stances, Deities, Dispel Magic, Epic Destiny Map, Fast Healing, Favor, Favored Enemy, Half-elf Enhancements, Monk Stances, Past Life, Potency, Potions, Ranger Spells, Summons, Tiered Loot.

  8. #8
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nibel View Post
    While I agree that Stalwarts should do more than just tanking, I can't see why you would like to heavily invest on the tanking tree if you want to mainly NOT tank. You can go up the tree without investing on the stance upgrades for desirable effects, and every core ability past the stance requires a shield, or involves +threat stuff.

    If your tank is in a quest where tankiness is not required, turn the stance off and benefit from your primal screams at will. It is not like the stance give you any extra damage at all.
    Which is why not having the STR/CON is pointless. Nobody will every use the stance anyway.

  9. #9
    Community Member FranOhmsford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Posts
    9,234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B0ltdrag0n View Post
    Neither of the effects in either class tree should require a shield at all. I say if you want it limited limit it to THF and sword and board.
    There IS a feat called Two Weapon Defense!

    There is NO reason why Two Weapon Fighting cannot have a defensive Bonus!

    Hey...I want my Sword & Board Fighter to be able to stand against the tide BUT I don't see why a Barbarian Fighter with a Greatsword or an Elven Tempest Kensai can't also defend themselves with their weapon/s of choice!


    The Devs are at this very moment Upgrading PARRYING on Weapons PROVING that they too believe in the ability to block blows with a weapon!


    And I don't care if Sword and Board is UNNEEDED in MOST Content - If I'm playing a Sword & Board Character he/she IS going to use that Sword and Board as much as possible!

    BUT I also have Greatsword Stalwarts {Warforged} who I feel should NOT be FORCED into being Kensais thank you very much!

  10. #10
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FranOhmsford View Post

    And I don't care if Sword and Board is UNNEEDED in MOST Content - If I'm playing a Sword & Board Character he/she IS going to use that Sword and Board as much as possible!
    I like piking as much as the next guy, but really?

  11. #11
    Community Member FranOhmsford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Posts
    9,234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teh_Troll View Post
    I like piking as much as the next guy, but really?
    And THIS ^ is why my Stalwarts tend to SOLO!

  12. #12
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FranOhmsford View Post
    And THIS ^ is why my Stalwarts tend to SOLO!
    I don't get that, how can you pike while soloing?

  13. #13
    Community Member Levonestral's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    388

    Default

    Curious. Would the shield bonus from TWF Defense, or the shield bonus from the white dragon armor be considered a shield for the purpose of these enhancement changes and allow us to have them activated?
    Leader of The Madborn, Thelanis
    Searros, Kangaros, Xearos, Fearos, Tearos, Zenros, Rocknros, Rargasauros, Whilyros, Frostyros, Rosificer, Levonestral, Clankros, Stabbyros

  14. #14
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Levonestral View Post
    Curious. Would the shield bonus from TWF Defense, or the shield bonus from the white dragon armor be considered a shield for the purpose of these enhancement changes and allow us to have them activated?
    no

  15. #15
    Community Member Thrudh's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    17,004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steelstar View Post
    In an upcoming Lamannia patch, you should see some changes to this tree, including:
    - Most of the low-tier enhancements no longer require a shield. Many of the higher-tier ones still do, however. (This is also true about the Sacred Defender tree).
    - Many of the enhancements have had their AP costs reduced, removing ~30 AP in total costs from the tree. (Sacred Defender has similarly had its costs reduced).
    Are those changes live?

    The upper-tier enhancements are the main ones that make SD worth taking. (+6 CON, +6 STR, 20% more hp). My TWF Stalwart Defender is switching to a Kensai/Tempest character and giving up on AC, relying solely on Dodge instead.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teh_Troll View Post
    We are no more d000m'd then we were a week ago.
    Quote Originally Posted by Eth View Post
    When you stop caring about xp/min this game becomes really fun. Trust me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gary_Gygax
    No single character has all the skills and resources needed to guarantee success in all endeavors; favorable results can usually only be achieved through group effort. No single player character wins, in the sense that he or she defeats all other player characters; the goal of the forces of good can only be attained through cooperation, so that victory is a group achievement rather than an individual one.

  16. #16
    Community Member Levonestral's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    388

    Default

    Well this is really disappointing.

    Players should still be able to have choices for their builds instead of being forced into cookie-cutter builds always using shields only.

    Could you consider making two lines instead? One that requires a shield, and follows the cheaper point cost. Then make another lines that does not require a shield, but has a higher cost to obtain? That could possibly allow you to "limit" builds using it by taking away their options in other trees due to the point restrictions.
    Leader of The Madborn, Thelanis
    Searros, Kangaros, Xearos, Fearos, Tearos, Zenros, Rocknros, Rargasauros, Whilyros, Frostyros, Rosificer, Levonestral, Clankros, Stabbyros

  17. #17
    Community Member FranOhmsford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Posts
    9,234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Levonestral View Post
    Well this is really disappointing.

    Players should still be able to have choices for their builds instead of being forced into cookie-cutter builds always using shields only.

    Could you consider making two lines instead? One that requires a shield, and follows the cheaper point cost. Then make another lines that does not require a shield, but has a higher cost to obtain? That could possibly allow you to "limit" builds using it by taking away their options in other trees due to the point restrictions.
    Or why not simply change the Pre to accept Two Weapon Defense as Use of Shield? {Obviously this may entail changing the feat slightly too}.

    PnP AD&D 2nd Ed. {No idea whether this was in 3rd Ed. or 3.5} Used to have a Single Weapon Style {Fighters Handbook - One Handed Weapon only} that UPGRADED AC!
    Single Weapon Style {Duelling Style} is the Black Sheep in DDO - No Feats for it whatsoever!
    Add it in!

    As for Two Handers - In EVERY SINGLE TV Show/Movie showing people fighting in this style {incl Highlander Claymore and Star Wars Lightsabers} The Combatants are SHOWN to be Parrying as much if not more than Striking!
    Add in a Parrying Feat that would also count as Shield Use for Stalwart/DoS!

  18. #18
    Community Member Levonestral's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    388

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FranOhmsford View Post
    Or why not simply change the Pre to accept Two Weapon Defense as Use of Shield? {Obviously this may entail changing the feat slightly too}.

    PnP AD&D 2nd Ed. {No idea whether this was in 3rd Ed. or 3.5} Used to have a Single Weapon Style {Fighters Handbook - One Handed Weapon only} that UPGRADED AC!
    Single Weapon Style {Duelling Style} is the Black Sheep in DDO - No Feats for it whatsoever!
    Add it in!

    As for Two Handers - In EVERY SINGLE TV Show/Movie showing people fighting in this style {incl Highlander Claymore and Star Wars Lightsabers} The Combatants are SHOWN to be Parrying as much if not more than Striking!
    Add in a Parrying Feat that would also count as Shield Use for Stalwart/DoS!

    Yeah, that was my original question earlier in this thread too. I was hoping either that feat or the shield bonuses provided from gear would also support their new stance requirements.

    That at least would have made me happy enough. But seems neither are currently supported.

    Doing your change would be a great solution to both problems. We just have to convince Turbine the same thing now
    Last edited by Levonestral; 07-28-2013 at 08:51 AM.
    Leader of The Madborn, Thelanis
    Searros, Kangaros, Xearos, Fearos, Tearos, Zenros, Rocknros, Rargasauros, Whilyros, Frostyros, Rosificer, Levonestral, Clankros, Stabbyros

  19. #19
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    819

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FranOhmsford View Post
    Or why not simply change the Pre to accept Two Weapon Defense as Use of Shield? {Obviously this may entail changing the feat slightly too}.

    PnP AD&D 2nd Ed. {No idea whether this was in 3rd Ed. or 3.5} Used to have a Single Weapon Style {Fighters Handbook - One Handed Weapon only} that UPGRADED AC!
    Single Weapon Style {Duelling Style} is the Black Sheep in DDO - No Feats for it whatsoever!
    Add it in!

    As for Two Handers - In EVERY SINGLE TV Show/Movie showing people fighting in this style {incl Highlander Claymore and Star Wars Lightsabers} The Combatants are SHOWN to be Parrying as much if not more than Striking!
    Add in a Parrying Feat that would also count as Shield Use for Stalwart/DoS!
    Well, this has been a complaint of mine in D&D since the dawn of time. A 20th level fighter wearing street clothes and armed with a sword should be very hard to hit... instead, any 1st level fighter with some strength can hit him at will (sure, he dies in 1 hit afterward, but still...). 90% of a melee characters defense should come from his combat skills than the armor he wears (which realistically should be more DR/PRR/miss chance than AC). Similarly, strength should apply to penetrating DR/PRR rather than really helping you to hit which is more skill and dex (not that str doesn't help; more str gets sword moving faster, helps over power a weak block, etc). But... all this requires effectively a whole new combat system, so we should focus on working within what we have.

    Why don't we just propose the following additions:

    Focused Rage (2ap): Being in defensive stance does not block rage effects

    Fluid Defense (4ap): When in defensive stance you are considered to be using a shield even if one isn't equipped for the purpose of all stalwart/DoS enhancements. If your off-hand is open gain +4 shield bonus.

  20. #20
    Community Member FranOhmsford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Posts
    9,234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Inoukchuk View Post
    Well, this has been a complaint of mine in D&D since the dawn of time. A 20th level fighter wearing street clothes and armed with a sword should be very hard to hit... instead, any 1st level fighter with some strength can hit him at will (sure, he dies in 1 hit afterward, but still...). 90% of a melee characters defense should come from his combat skills than the armor he wears (which realistically should be more DR/PRR/miss chance than AC). Similarly, strength should apply to penetrating DR/PRR rather than really helping you to hit which is more skill and dex (not that str doesn't help; more str gets sword moving faster, helps over power a weak block, etc). But... all this requires effectively a whole new combat system, so we should focus on working within what we have.

    Why don't we just propose the following additions:

    Focused Rage (2ap): Being in defensive stance does not block rage effects

    Fluid Defense (4ap): When in defensive stance you are considered to be using a shield even if one isn't equipped for the purpose of all stalwart/DoS enhancements. If your off-hand is open gain +4 shield bonus.
    Aaaargh Sorry but I can't stomach attacks on D&D's AC System!

    AC like HP was an Abstract Concept!

    It counted Every possible Defense!

    Stuff like Dodge and PRR were completely Unnecessary as Systems in their own right!

    PRR is an Upgrade of DR that was desperately needed for DDO and has nothing whatsoever to do with AC - The Devs should have scrapped DR and replaced that with PRR in my mind!

    Dodge is a part of AC determined by a character's Dexterity - Dex is the Black Sheep Stat of DDO as is - The ONLY Stat that has ALL Minimum Requirements rather than Maximums Needed!

    2nd Ed. PnP allowed a Rogue wearing No Armour basically the same AC as a Fighter in +5 Full Plate
    2nd Ed's My Game BUT I don't think that changed with 3rd or 3.5 - Did it?

    Also:
    Why does Insightful Reflexes NOT provide an AC Boost? - Wizards NEED AC too thank you very much!


    The problem is {looking at what I've typed in this post} that:

    AC and DR should have been scrapped!
    AND REPLACED BY
    Dodge and PRR!

    Instead of the Current Hodge Podge!

    Dodge would be Reflex Based Armour Class - Avoiding being hit!
    PRR would be Armour Based Damage Reduction!
    Every Character would need some of BOTH!

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload