Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Goumindong" data-source="post: 4399293" data-attributes="member: 70874">Different =/= Better. You get +2 AC/Ref. I get to breath underwater when its necessary. You get +2 AC/Reflex, i gain an extra 50% of my total hit points per day.This is only true if your DM is a retard. Lets hope your DM is not a retard. I say this because there is an expectation that your DM is a rational person and is taking rational actions for the enemies(and giving reasons for seemingly irrational actions). Rational people, whether they think they do or not, follow pretty standard decision making processes revolving around costs and benefits. In combat situations costs and benefits become very clear(where they are otherwise very difficult to ascertain) and easy to understand because most people have very similar high priorities for things like "staying alive" and "my friends staying alive". When these priorities come into conflict with other priorities(like how much you spend on dry cleaning), the "staying alive" priorities win out. So, unless your DM is bonkers, he is going to be thinking like this whether you want him to or not.There are two factors to any decision that someone makes. These factors are1. Benefit2. CostIf you reduce the benefit of taking an action you increase relatively the value of doing something else. If you reduce the cost of an action you increase relatively the value of doing that thing. ED; or, to be a bit simpler. If you reduce the benefit of doing something, you reduce its frequency, if you increase the cost you reduce its frequency. If you increase the benefit of doing something, you increase its frequency, if you decrease the cost of doing something you increase its frequency.Cost is "what you have to give up to get what you want" so the cost of attacking someone other than the fighter is: One action, the average damage you would do for attacking someone else factoring in that targets value, the average damage you incur for attacking that target factoring in that targets value. And the benefit is the average damage you do to that target. A great weapon fighter, on the "cost" side of that consideration, increases two factors over the shield fighter. This means that so long as the enemy can attack someone else, he is more likely to attack the great weapon fighter than the shield fighter over some other target.When a fighter increases his AC this reduces the benefit of attacking him. This makes enemies want to attack him less. When a fighter deals less damage with his OAs and combat challenge this reduces the cost of attacking someone other than the fighter. This makes enemies want to attack other people more. A fighter, when trying to make sure he and his friends survive, wants to get himself to be attacked more than his friends. A fighter wants his AC to be just high enough that he doesn't get hit a lot, but low enough that people would rather attack him than his friends with the -2 penalty. (and more and he is giving the enemy undue benefit). But finding that point is not easy. And all things considered, since the fighter has more hit points, more healing surges, more abilities to repair himself, and less abilities to impose damage and status effects on the enemy. Its better to err on the side of getting hit than letting your friends get hit.Great weapon fighters do this by really making it appetizing to hit them and really unappetizing to hit someone else. Sword and board fighters do this by interposing themselves between them and the enemy and not letting them past. The more melee fighters you have that are likely to be up close and personal, the better the great weapon fighter is(because he has to take attacks rather than just get in the way and hinder movement). If you have a bunch of ranged guys, then wanting them to hit you is not necessary, since you can instead get in front of them, keep them from getting around you, and make yourself the only target in that manner.Healing spent on the fighter which has more healing surges and a higher healing surge value is more efficient than healing spent on the rogue which has fewer hit points and a lower healing surge value. Unless everyones AC is so high that the monsters are barely hitting, the increased value of healing the fighter is likely to outweigh the value of the strikers slightly higher AC. In the end though, the monsters are making a rational choice for which character to attack and they will choose what they think is best. If they are choosing the strikers(and if you're sword/board they will be a lot more than if you're great weapon) then you, as a defender, are likely not doing as good a job as you ought to be.If the Cleric and Wizard are ranged characters, then the sword/board is probably best, just make sure your rogue can take a few hits. Dwarfs have a bonus to wisdom which is great for laser clerics, the ranger is stated as archery, and wizards can be kinda half and half, but is likely to be in the back with the Cleric who can heal him and the ranger who can pick off threats that get through the line.(or the wizard is in front, using movement to hold threats forward, who knows).I would start fairly neutral and not select too many feats you can't get out of via retraining before you decide whether or not to be a sword and board or great weapon. See whether or not your party needs someone sticky, or someone interposing. Since there is likely to be only one other guy up front with you, the shield is probably a better bet, you can use your daily and encounter powers to protect him while interposing and worry less about running out of powers to stop them from hitting your friends.(fewer friends in range mean fewer friends to use your shield utilities on)ed: sorry if its a bit rambling after the edits, if you have a question ask and ill explain further.</blockquote>

Verification