Which is better: Offense or Defense?
Elder-Basilisk
First Post
That's what I get for replying to a thread early in the morning. I read your previous statement
"Yes both. Only one is not really good."
as
"Yes, both offense and defense are possible except that one of these two isn't really an effective option."
Oops.
"Yes both. Only one is not really good."
as
"Yes, both offense and defense are possible except that one of these two isn't really an effective option."
Oops.
Thanee said:
(Psi)SeveredHead
Adventurer
I'd go with high defense. It sucks to have to cast Heal after every combat. Eventually you run out of Heal and even Mass Heal, and there's still more fighting ahead. I noticed that the Defenders of Daybreak optimize themselves for combat by cranking up the AC. (I also noted that Persistent Barkskin isn't actually allowed - oh well). I think Displacement and Mirror Image are just incredibly amazing spells.
Some of the nastiest spellcasting combos involve Fly (annoy fighters) and Improved Invisibility. PirateCat used this strat against the very powerful Defenders... killing Agar. Then again, his kobold cleric slapped Raevyn with Harm. With so few hp, Raeven spent the next several rounds wildshaping in a desperate attempt to raise her hp.
I've also noted (as has everyone, I'm sure) that save DCs go up really fast. A 20th-level fighter has only a small chance of saving against a Finger of Death spell cast by a wizard with Int 20, with +6 headband of Intellect. That fighter is strongly advised to boost his Con any way he can, get a +5 cloak of resistance, and take Great Fortitude, just to protect his best save
In this case, the fighter's best strategy is to go all offense, and Power Attack the wizard... a readied action, of course, to break any spells.
+11 to Initiative is impressive, except if you roll a 3.
Some of the nastiest spellcasting combos involve Fly (annoy fighters) and Improved Invisibility. PirateCat used this strat against the very powerful Defenders... killing Agar. Then again, his kobold cleric slapped Raevyn with Harm. With so few hp, Raeven spent the next several rounds wildshaping in a desperate attempt to raise her hp.
I've also noted (as has everyone, I'm sure) that save DCs go up really fast. A 20th-level fighter has only a small chance of saving against a Finger of Death spell cast by a wizard with Int 20, with +6 headband of Intellect. That fighter is strongly advised to boost his Con any way he can, get a +5 cloak of resistance, and take Great Fortitude, just to protect his best save
In this case, the fighter's best strategy is to go all offense, and Power Attack the wizard... a readied action, of course, to break any spells.+11 to Initiative is impressive, except if you roll a 3.
Interesting one, but for PCs, I favour defense.
Why? Simple.
The PCs, by-and-large, are (in most campaigns) going to get into a *lot* of combats. Now, offense is all well and good if it's a one-off smack-smack arena-type battle. I have little doubt that if you get the smackdown grinders from the Sultans and ask them to churn out powerhouses and hurl them against each other, the offensive camp will win.
But in the long-run, the defensives will hold out. Sure, you can knock off the monsters. But one day, you're going to be surprised, ambushed, critically hit, forced to make that save or roll poorly for initiative. That's when you suddenly crumple: and crumple completely. At most of the gritty levels, you only really get one chance, and if you flunk it, you're dead.
NPCs, by contrast, would be better off with offense. Save for recurring villains, they only fight the PCs once. If they can mash them just that once, they've won.
So- on balance, if you want a long-term character (e.g. PC) then defense is better. Single-shot smackdowns favour the offensive.
Why? Simple.
The PCs, by-and-large, are (in most campaigns) going to get into a *lot* of combats. Now, offense is all well and good if it's a one-off smack-smack arena-type battle. I have little doubt that if you get the smackdown grinders from the Sultans and ask them to churn out powerhouses and hurl them against each other, the offensive camp will win.
But in the long-run, the defensives will hold out. Sure, you can knock off the monsters. But one day, you're going to be surprised, ambushed, critically hit, forced to make that save or roll poorly for initiative. That's when you suddenly crumple: and crumple completely. At most of the gritty levels, you only really get one chance, and if you flunk it, you're dead.
NPCs, by contrast, would be better off with offense. Save for recurring villains, they only fight the PCs once. If they can mash them just that once, they've won.
So- on balance, if you want a long-term character (e.g. PC) then defense is better. Single-shot smackdowns favour the offensive.
Victim
First Post
In terms of physical type damage, offense usually wins. HP evaporate quickly and fully buffed characters have the bonuses and attacks to usually beat out high ACs. Also, offensive characters can find ways to negate parts of a foe's defense, with Brilliant Energy weapons, tricks to deny Dex, touch attacks, etc.
However, magical battles seem to favor defense, especially prepared defense. A tenth level character can block 2 maximized fireballs with protection from elements. Stuff like Death Ward, Spell Immunity, Spell Resistance, Negative Plane Protection, the Elemental resistence and protection spells, etc are all pretty good at defense. And there's also Antimagic Field, which is as perfect a defense against magical attacks as you can get.
Another thing to consider is that most supplements focus on offense. The min-maxed use everything wizard is likely to be some Archmage with huge save DCs who can shoot sonic spells to get past most resistances, so he'll be much better on the attack because he more easily defeats saves, SR, and resistances. However, it's just as easy to crush him as to crush a PHB wizard.
I like to have offensive fighters and defensive casters. Then your magical power stays intact, so it's easy to heal or raise the fighters. Also, since much of a fighter's power depends on magic items, he can grow along with the casters as they upgrade his gear.
However, magical battles seem to favor defense, especially prepared defense. A tenth level character can block 2 maximized fireballs with protection from elements. Stuff like Death Ward, Spell Immunity, Spell Resistance, Negative Plane Protection, the Elemental resistence and protection spells, etc are all pretty good at defense. And there's also Antimagic Field, which is as perfect a defense against magical attacks as you can get.
Another thing to consider is that most supplements focus on offense. The min-maxed use everything wizard is likely to be some Archmage with huge save DCs who can shoot sonic spells to get past most resistances, so he'll be much better on the attack because he more easily defeats saves, SR, and resistances. However, it's just as easy to crush him as to crush a PHB wizard.
I like to have offensive fighters and defensive casters. Then your magical power stays intact, so it's easy to heal or raise the fighters. Also, since much of a fighter's power depends on magic items, he can grow along with the casters as they upgrade his gear.
Tony Vargas
Legend
There's a built in tendency for PCs to favour defense: this in an RPG, and you can't roleplay a dead character. The game, itself, give such a wide variety of possible offensive strategies, though, that's it's impossible for a PC to be able to depend on defense all the time.
So, you need to strike a balance. In general, PCs, who are expected to survivie multiple encounters willnot neglect defense, while monsters, who, in a real sense, most often exist only for a single encounter, will be remembered for thier offensive power (and thus designed with that in mind).
So, you need to strike a balance. In general, PCs, who are expected to survivie multiple encounters willnot neglect defense, while monsters, who, in a real sense, most often exist only for a single encounter, will be remembered for thier offensive power (and thus designed with that in mind).
I myself try and go for both.
I cast Vicid Discharge on myself before we go into combat.
when someone hits me they get nailed for lots of electrical damage with no save.
Also casting Fire Shield & Acid Shield never hurts either.
Acid Shield works like the 1st level shield spell except your foes take damage if they hit you and if you die while it is active it bows up and shoots acid in a certain radius around you.
You can never go wrong with using haste either. You can consider it a bonus to offense and defense
I cast Vicid Discharge on myself before we go into combat.
when someone hits me they get nailed for lots of electrical damage with no save.
Also casting Fire Shield & Acid Shield never hurts either.
Acid Shield works like the 1st level shield spell except your foes take damage if they hit you and if you die while it is active it bows up and shoots acid in a certain radius around you.
You can never go wrong with using haste either. You can consider it a bonus to offense and defense
Similar Threads
