Tempest Fighter makes me happy.
- Thread starter That One Guy
- Start date
RefinedBean
First Post
It's usually assumed that a 1H fighter will have a +2 Shield, which is added to both AC and Ref.
The 1H fighter is using a heavy shield, which gives a +2 bonus to reflex defense as well as AC.
And a -2 to athletics, acrobatics, endurance, stealth, and thievery....something that is often forgotten in the debates between THW and SB
Baumi
Adventurer
I think the Sword and Board and Greatweaponfighter should be compared with a +1 Shield since it is IMHO the default (no penalties and it lets you use the hand for potions and grapples).
But back to the original Threatdiscussion about the two-weapon fighter ... I don't get the reason behind it, the new Build is simply to close to the Ranger.
I would have understood if the build a heavy Armor non-mobile variant for the fighter but now he simulates the Ranger but with a few healing surges more and marking abilities (but less hp's, damage and fewer multiple Target Powers).
But back to the original Threatdiscussion about the two-weapon fighter ... I don't get the reason behind it, the new Build is simply to close to the Ranger.
I would have understood if the build a heavy Armor non-mobile variant for the fighter but now he simulates the Ranger but with a few healing surges more and marking abilities (but less hp's, damage and fewer multiple Target Powers).
Chris_Nightwing
First Post
I totally agree, my character would really suffer with check penalties and the spare hand for a potion or torch saves no end of actions.
The 2W fighter will have less AC than the 2HW if they want to do all that extra damage. They'll have one more reflex. I think the better basic attack is being overlooked too. If you have a Warlord or op-attack inducing enemies then the 2HW is dishing out much more damage.
That One Guy
First Post
I'm actually thinking that the Tempest'll end up stepping on the Artful Dodger rogue's toes more in the long run. Just... if the three encounter powers supplied hold true, at least. I also think that the range will still have more self move powers while the fighter will still have more push/pull/slide enemy powers. A prediction and gut feeling, anyway.
eamon
Explorer
Kzach:
A 2HF does significantly more damage than a 1HF. A rather well-known minotaur build competes favorably with strikers, and it still has the fighter's advantageous class features.
In general however, if you expect a fighter to both deal ranger-level damage and be sticky and have a high-AC and high ref (not to mention the excellent weapon-type bonuses and combat challenge/superiority)... well, you're asking for rather a lot, right?
The usefulness of a 2HF vs. a sword-n-boarder is party dependent. If you're the damage soak, then you're better off optimizing your defenses. If that's less important to you, then you're free to choose other things.
A 2HF does significantly more damage than a 1HF. A rather well-known minotaur build competes favorably with strikers, and it still has the fighter's advantageous class features.
In general however, if you expect a fighter to both deal ranger-level damage and be sticky and have a high-AC and high ref (not to mention the excellent weapon-type bonuses and combat challenge/superiority)... well, you're asking for rather a lot, right?
The usefulness of a 2HF vs. a sword-n-boarder is party dependent. If you're the damage soak, then you're better off optimizing your defenses. If that's less important to you, then you're free to choose other things.
Saeviomagy
Adventurer
2H fighters are, if anything, more sticky than either of the 1H weapon fighters, just by virtue of their OA and combat challenge being more potent.
Similar Threads
