Community

For me it depends more on mark punishment than anything. Sure, the enemies will have a -2 or possibly a -3 to hit another target; but if the warrior is going to absorb most of the damage they'd be dealing anyways the only other incentives for an emey to attack the warrior are convenience and mark punishment.

If the warrior's hit is low, then his combat challenge is much less likely to hit and when it does the damage it deals is likely to also be negligible. Likewise, his OA's won't have much extra oomph behind them because his wis mod (or dex mod plus a feat) is very likely a +1 or less. As long as the other players in the party don't have equivalent AC then there is almost always going to be a better target for them for each of their attacks than the warrior.

But hey, whatever, the important thing is ensuring he is using all the powers/feats/class-features/THP-rules properly and has the updated versions of each.

For sure, Melee training Con would help him a great deal (if he is indeed stacked so high in con and not just calculating his THP incorrectly). As someone pointed out earlier, that would gimp most of his othr powers significantly.

Plus didn't the OP say that he was playing a fighter/warden hybrid?

Edit: I reread the OP, he said hybrid fighter/warder. I assume he meant warden.

Aug 29, 2010 -- 8:34AM, Alitain wrote:

Excuse me Weasels, there's no need to be rude.  All I was pointing out is that he may have rolled his stats which is perfectly fine way to get stats.  Its not house ruling, let alone a stupid house rule.  Just because you use the point buy system doesn't make those who don't stupid, so not its not the same as saying "he might be bad at math and think 4+4=14".

And it says in the book you can roll your stats, check out page 17-18, "Generating Ability Scores" section.  It gives you 3 ways to generate scores.  Method 1: Standard Array, Method 2: Customizing Scores(Point buy), Method 3: Rolling Scores.

So he can be playing by the book and the group could be rolling stats which is perfectly legal.  As I said, I was just pointing out that just because he started with a 20 Con doesn't mean his defenses blow.

I didn't read it as being rude, just straightforward.  You're right that rolling for stats is listed in the book, but LordofWeasels is also right that "he just rolled really well" is another way to say "he's breaking fundamental assumptions about the game".  A PC who starts with multiple 17s and/or 18s really is fundamentally different from a PC made using point-buy, in ways which really do violate the basic assumptions about PC power level. 

As a particularly relevant example, one of the few drawbacks of the Battlerage Vigor feature for fighters is that forgoing Weapon Talent and prioritizing Con (as well as using axes/hammers) tends to drive your attack bonus down, in some cases below the 50% mark.  However, if you roll two really good stats, that drawback disappears, and you have a fully functional attacking PC who gets effective resist 5-10 against the first melee or close attack every round.

Aug 31, 2010 -- 7:59AM, LordOfWeasels wrote:

Aug 31, 2010 -- 7:56AM, mccowen wrote:

However, if you roll two really good stats, that drawback disappears, and you have a fully functional attacking PC who gets effective resist 5-10 against the first melee or close attack every round.

Notably, it's not "first" and it's not "melee or close" any more.

The temp HP that the Rager gets apply against all attacks.

Well, the temp hp will ablate against the first successful attack, but you're correct.  I haven't DMed for a battlerager since before the update/nerf (was that really over a year ago?), and at that point the only way to reliably damage him was to include lots of artillery creatures; it sort of sticks in my memory.  (c:

Aug 31, 2010 -- 8:25AM, Plaguescarred wrote:

It's not true LoW. The BRV still gain THP whenever he hit with a melee or close attack or when he hit or miss with an Invigorating Power. A BRV wouldn't gain any THP on a RBA for exemple, even if he hit.

Now he gets temp HP *when he hits*.

Not *when he is hit by*.