Are fighters that specialize in spiked chain viable/survivable at most/all levels?

[Nail]

Come on, arandomgod! Don't let facts get in the way of a great theory!

I've only play-tested it with NPCs, as encounters for the party. I've never seen it played as a PC, nor have I read about it in the storyhours.

 

[ARandomGod]

Come on, arandomgod! Don't let facts get in the way of a great theory!

Heheh. Well, you know, normally I'm all for a great theory. I was just dissapointed to see so few actual "I've done this and.." responses.

It may be one of the best pure fighter builds at higher levels (I'd say definately in the top three), but are pure fighter builds even viable at higher levels to begin with? Even the best ones?

A very good point. But it would be nice if at least some of them were, wouldn't it?

Sounds potent, right? It never worked. That party simply would NOT coordinate tactics. He eventually died because...

Ahh (wipes away tear). Classic. In a game not too long ago the rest of the party (I was in) spent three rounds setting up a potentially deadly effect, only to have the guy in charge of the actual execution say "What? I'm not gonna do that! I'm a fighter!!"

Good times, good times...

 

[Zimbel]

I think you overestimate the significance of crit range/multipliers. At most, a good crit range or multiplier with keen or improved critical will multiply your damage by 1.3--assuming a 100% confirmation rate which is only realistic for paladins using the bless weapon spell. Otherwise, it hovers between 50 and 70%. So, you're talking about a 15-21% increase in damage dice from crits using a falchion, scimitar, heavy pick, or scythe. Of course, the two handed weapons in that group have the same base damage as the chain, so there's no exponential advantage there. A character wielding a x3 or 19-20 weapon with Imp Crit will see a 10-15% increase in damage. Since the comparable weapons there are guisarme, glaive, greatsword, and greataxe, there is sometimes a slight exponential effect. A spiked chain wielder does get crits though and with Imp Crit or keen will gain a 5-7% damage increase. And all that only applies against crittable foes. It will be less significant against foes with fortification armor, undead, constructs, plants, etc.

So, you're talking about a 10-14% damage advantage from crit qualities in cases where that matters. That's significant, but remember that it only adds up to about three points of damage when the character is maxed out for critting and does 30 points per swing.

Now, if you consider that flurry of blows (EWM ability) gives the chain wielder an extra attack at full BAB -2, and roughly estimate that 66% of a level 11-15 fighter's damage comes from the first attacks, (counting a haste attack from a speed weapon or boots of speed so he has 2 first attacks), the flurry of blows ability is likely to increase full attack damage against all foes by 33% or so. The extra attack is two to three times as significant as the difference in critical qualities.

I'm not following your math. Assuming that your entire threat range hits, increasing it by 1 at x2 is a 5% increase in damage. Increasing it by 2 is a 10% increase in damage. In the case in point (20/x2 vs 20/x3), The better multiplier is a 5% increase in damage. Making both keen or taking imp. crit gives (19-20/x2 vs 19-20/x3) which is a 10% increase in damage (again, assuming that a natural 19 will hit - otherwise, it's 5%).

I could see reducing these numbers to account for creatures/NPCs that can't be crit, or have some crit protection, but I don't see where you're getting numbers like 7% or 14%.

 

[Zimbel]

However I'm not seeing what I personally hoped to see, that being people who've actually playtested the combo at all levels. In specific higher levels, because I've personally seen it several times through low to mid levels.

Now, as for actual playtesting experience, like I said I’ve seen it in play up to mid levels. At low levels it’s nice, it gets better up to mid levels, at which point it seems to plateau, and even seems to decrease in power from levels 10 to 15. I don’t know how they play from 15+, I’ve never seen it… however from what I have seen it seems likely that it loses power rapidly.

So MY question, is that decrease in power after level 12 or so an illusion? Or is it just that it stops increasing in power at the same rate, and that’s when other builds are catching up? IS the playstyle viable for all 20 levels? What about epic progression? (Actually that doesn’t matter very much to me, I don’t like epic progression, but I’m still curious).

I've been part of a campaign where it was used for levels 8-16. The spiked chain was pretty good, particuarly with feats that can take advantage of its reach and Enlarge (preferably permenant). That PC did not, however, dominate the game, and the player eventually switched out for a character with a more traditional weapon.

I've also seen it used in a current game from LV 1-4. My opinion is that for that game, it's a bit weak, since at low levels, with few of the support feats, its advantages don't outweigh the disadvantage of not having a shield. Note that we are frequently swarmed with many, many low CR creatures, so AC ends up being more important than normal (+2 to AC in some combats would have 1/2ed the damage received).

The real problem at LV 14+ is not that the spiked chain is weak- it's that major spellcasters blow through the roof in power somewhere around that level (Sorcerer a bit earlier, Cleric a bit later). All weapons are weak by LV 15 or so; the primary purpose of front liners becomes meat-shielding, not damage dealing. When I played a high-level sorcerer, my character was nearly the offensive strength of the rest of the entire party - and that was a party that was heavily pumped by her spells.

 

[Nail]

I'm not following your math....

Oh goody! Math!

I can write out the derivation for this if you want me to. In the interest of space (and attention span of some readers), I'll just post the equation:

A = Average Damage per attack
P= Probability to hit, expressed as a fraction
Pc=Probability to threat, as a fraction
Mc=Critcal multiplier

A = PD[1+Pc(Mc-1)]

So, for a longsword (1d8/19-20x2), and neglecting Str, magic, etc, we've got:

A = P x 4.5 x[1 + 0.1(2-1)]
A = P x 4.5 x[1 + 0.1]
A = P x 4.5 x 1.1
A = P x 4.95

In Other Words, the critical range and multiplier on a long sword increase its average damage by 10%. Less if your probability to hit is less than 10%.

 

[Nail]

... by LV 15 or so, the primary purpose of front liners becomes meat-shielding, not damage dealing.

So long as the cleric is FAILING in his/her job.

I currently play a Clr 19 (I've played this PC since 4th level). The best possible option for me is almost always buffing the fighters to increase their damage output. After a round or so, the damage from spell-slingers pales in comparison to that from our front line fighters.

 

[Zimbel]

Oh goody! Math!

I can write out the derivation for this if you want me to. In the interest of space (and attention span of some readers), I'll just post the equation:

A = Average Damage per attack
P= Probability to hit, expressed as a fraction
Pc=Probability to threat, as a fraction
Mc=Critcal multiplier

A = PD[1+Pc(Mc-1)]

So, for a longsword (1d8/19-20x2), and neglecting Str, magic, etc, we've got:

A = P x 4.5 x[1 + 0.1(2-1)]
A = P x 4.5 x[1 + 0.1]
A = P x 4.5 x 1.1
A = P x 4.95

In Other Words, the critical range and multiplier on a long sword increase its average damage by 10%. Less if your probability to hit is less than 10%.

I agree. It is 10% assuming no crit resistance, and that a natural 19 hits. 5% in the case that a nat 19 misses (but a nat 20 hits).

 

[Zimbel]

So long as the cleric is FAILING in his/her job.

I currently play a Clr 19 (I've played this PC since 4th level). The best possible option for me is almost always buffing the fighters to increase their damage output. After a round or so, the damage from spell-slingers pales in comparison to that from our front line fighters.

Interesting... in our high-level party (8-22), the Sorcerer was the primary buffer (Mass Haste/ Imp. Invis/Fly), not the Cleric; she was secondary (Greater Magic Weapon, Protection from Elements, Magic Vestment, and Spell Resistance). The Cleric primarily used Harm and Mass Heal at high levels. Frankly, a lot of combats were over by the end of round 2 (mind you, this was 3.0, which might be part of the discrepancy). Those that weren't typically were because there were a /lot/ of combatants, which meant that mass damage spells were more effective than "killing everything in reach", which was the best the fighter-types could do.

I'm curious as to what spells you feel are so effective as to typically spend the first round or two casting them as short-term buffs around LV 19.

 

[Nail]

I'm curious as to what spells you feel are so effective as to typically spend the first round or two casting them as short-term buffs around LV 19.

Easy-peasy:

• Quickened Recitation followed by Righteous Wrath of the Faithful, or
• Holy Aura, or
• Spell Resistance, Mass, or
• Summon Monster (for flankers/crowd control)

Not to mention those spells my Clr 19 has on the party members already. Everyone, for example, has +5 weapons and armor...without having to spend their wealth on it.

 

[IanB]

Say you're a medieval land-owner outfitting a militia for whatever reason. Are you going to outfit them with spiked chains, which would be difficult to use, difficult to train people to use effectively, difficult to find people knowlegable enough in their use to train others, and probably a real pain to find or produce? Or are you going to go for swords, which are common enough that people at least generally know how to use them and are easier to procure?

It's a convienience factor. The typical medieval "longsword" was effeective enough and common enough, and therefore became ubiquitous. Thus my Windows analogy. Corporations don't use it because it's the most effective/stable/secure. They use it because it's the most common.

Er, no. You're going to give them spears which are actually cheap and actually easy to train people with. Swords were relatively expensive, and you never saw a 'militia' force using them. Most medieval peasant forces were armed with improvised spears and such created from farm implements - in fact, many if not most of the polearms out there got their start as a farm implement tied to the end of a pole.