The one responsible for defense.

[The Grackle]

Xini, if your'e the one with a sense of tactics and teamwork, YOU should be playing the party cleric. Seriously. Take over as party leader. Come up w/plans and give orders. Let ineffective/selfish characters die.

 

[Rystil Arden]

This would be a good build. I would consider a tower shield, though, instead of a heavy shield. This would give you an AC of 23 when combined with Dwarven Battleplate. You won't deal quite as much damage as you could with a two-handed weapon, but you'd be pretty hard to hit. If you can manage a 12 Dex and the Dodge feat, you are looking at an AC of 25 without any magical help.

If you can manage to take the Dodge feat with 12 Dex, I salute you

 

[Nifft]

4th level Dwarf fighter? Spiked chain. Seriously.

1/ Exotic Weapon (Spiked Chain), Weapon Focus (Spiked Chain)
2/ Combat Expertise
3/ Improved Trip
4/ Weapon Spec (Spiked Chain); Str +1

Stats (28 point buy):

Str: 15 (14 + 1), Dex: 14, Con: 14, Int: 14, Wis: 12, Cha: 6

At 6th level, you will take Combat Reflexes (so those standing up will get smacked again), and Dodge. At 7th and 8th levels, you will take levels in Exotic Weapon Master (from Complete Warrior) and get Exotic Flurry and Trip Trick.

Now you'll be a Fighter 6 / XWM 2. You can take levels in Dwarf Paragon (not a bad class at all, and flavorful if you're putting some of your 4 skill points per level into Craft skills, but hardly a munchkin choice). Or you could take two more levels of Fighter and then go Dwarven Defender.

The latter might look like this:

5/ Ftr 5 --
6/ Ftr 6 -- Combat Reflexes, Dodge
7/ Exotic Weapon Master (Exotic Flurry)
8/ Exotic Weapon Master (Trip Trick)
9/ Ftr 7 -- Toughness (ouch)
10/ Ftr 8 -- Endurance (ouch)
11/ DD 1
12/ DD 2 -- Melee Weapon Mastery (Slashing)
13/ DD 3
14/ DD 4
15/ DD 5 -- Power Attack
16/ DD 6
17/ DD 7
18/ DD 8 -- Improved Sunder
19/ DD 9
20/ DD 10

As a Dwarven Defender, you can really do a good job controlling your current location on the battlefield, since you get a nice Dodge bonus to AC, and then more of a bonus when you enter your stance.

The DR is pretty sweet, too.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

*peeps carefully round the corner*

Yeah, so, I'm, um, the DM of this group. Hi. How is everyone?

Good to hear from you.

Alrighty then...a few points to make which may explain some of the carnage....

1. One of the cleric players is completely new to D&D and as such (by no fault of his player) is being played at maybe 50% effectiveness at present. Maybe I should run him through a few one on one fights? I'll see what he says.
2. The other cleric is an archer and as such doesn't have anything like the AC he would need to withstand melee. His player has never played a cleric before either- only an artillery sorceror. He's very much still learning what to do when.

Both of these facts explain a lot. Also, the original poster noted that the cleric archer is a multiclass ranger/cleric which doesn't help matters--in terms of straight-up fighting power, a ranger/cleric is generally a few steps behind a straightforward cleric archer.

I'd also guess that your relatively new players probably haven't made the optimal choices in character design that often make cleric archers and melee clerics strong. (And they're not yet into the levels where melee clerics really come into their own either).

3. I've had four deaths in as many levels. The first of these was due to a 10HP aasimar cleric trying to hold up the bad guy long enough for the actual melee guys to heal up. Second was a rogue whose player is fairly notorious for staying in the thick of things for one more round before he retreats. Third was a gnomish paladin who went up against an ogre already wounded then got critted. And last night Xini's character who was hit by a vampire and level drained while already wounded.

Bad luck and poor tactics will do a party in pretty quickly. And from the sounds of the later part of your post, the party's response--using combat expertise heavily and otherwise sacrificing offense for defense probably doesn't help matters here. An overly brash group can often power through even after making a bad decision or two. On the other hand, if they go defensive will often compound the initial blunder by allowing an enemy to follow up on their advantage without suffering in turn.

4. I roll openly. And have extraordinarily good dice rolls most of the time. This does not add up to long-lived PCs, particularly...
5. ...when most of them can't roll above a 5 in your average combat

Unlike some other DMs, I heartily recommend rolling in the open. It's plenty survivable by PCs unless luck really goes against them. Even things like the players seeing what you rolled and figuring out the monsters' attack bonuses isn't a problem. "That goblin just rolled a 5 and hit AC 18!?!" "You know, he did seem awfully strong for a goblin..." That is exactly the kind of information that players who are fighting an ogre mage disguised as a goblin should get.

The best bit about it is that it builds trust between the players and the DM and that there is no suspicion of favoritism and there is also no need to fudge your rolls. Do you fudge for one player but not another? When you judge it to not be the player's fault that he's getting reamed? How much do you fudge? All of these choices make it difficult to really be fair to players when fudging. This is especially true if players decide to gamble. "I'll go for the 1/20 shot of getting the evil fighter/barbarian with a destruction spell." OK, you roll a 1 on the bad guy's save. Do you fudge it and have him succeed? After all, you've fudged in the PCs' favor before and it will make the encounter much more interesting. On the other hand, if you do that, the player might as well not bother with his spell. In general, I think combat ending spells like slay living, finger of death, and even color spray and sleep change from calculated risks that the odds will work in your favor to risks that have to be calculated on how the DM is feeling at the time. That's not a good thing.

The gamble goes from being a long shot to being no shot. The same is true for the character who takes a seemingly low-risk gamble that ends up backfiring. "OK, so my character is going to walk past all the zombies, provoking AoOs. I have elusive target, so when they miss me, I'll get a trip attack against them and I'll thus keep them from swarming the other party members." Not a bad tactic (and one I've used myself upon occasion). But, if the first three zombies roll twenties, the character is going to take a lot of damage and won't accomplish his goal. If you're rolling behind the screen, are you going to fudge the second and the third twenty? How about the 19 after that? If you do, the player is essentially being given a pass on the risks that his strategy poses. They're good risks, but even good risks are still risks--and should remain risks if you want your game to involve real risks and your characters decisions to have real consequences. If, on the other hand, you let the dice stand while rolling behind a screen, you foster suspicion that you're cheating against the players (particularly on a very hot streak of dice) and players might get the sense that you just don't want them to try that tactic.

On the whole, the fact that random dice rarely produce an average result makes me very leery of going back to rolling in secret.

6. At least one of the PCs frequently runs around on low HP because 'the cleric didn't ask if I wanted healing'. I am considering some sort of HP indication system to avoid this- we used to do 'red sticker on the forehead if you're at less than half HP' Maybe we'll return to that

I'd gently suggest that he ask the cleric when he wants healing then.

7. It's rare for either of the clerics or the wizard to buff the party
8. Bickering is commonplace. Tactics are not.

Do the players enjoy this? If not, you should have an out of character talk about getting some more unity among the players.

On the other hand, if your players enjoy the kind of every man for himself mentality, but don't enjoy getting reamed, you still might want to briefly point out to them that, they would have a much easier time of things if they worked together more and that the individualism that they enjoy might need to be mitigated a bit so that it doesn't produce the defeat that they don't enjoy.

9. Rolls on healing wands are almost always very low. I can't explain it. In one recent fight one of the clerics was out for about five rounds trying to heal up and kept rolling ones. Wands of faith healing are now being discussed, but wouldn't help all of the party, so they are figuring out how to balance it.

Bad luck happens. This should be cured simply by keeping playing. The law of averages dictates that unless a player accidentally bought one of those 8 sided d4s (that people use to avoid having caltrops in their dice bag), the d8s should average out to 4.5 sooner or later. Also, the players are just entering the zone where cure light wounds is no longer sufficient combat healing and when, with higher caster levels, the dice are a smaller overall portion of the healing result. For out of combat healing, 3 1s in a row on your wand of CLW is just a matter of inefficiently used resources. For in-combat healing, it's a matter of life and death.

10. Expertise and similar feats are used liberally, leading to very drawn out fights and more damage being taken over all than if they'd just walked up and smacked the thing.

I mentioned this before in passing, but another thing to note here. If multiple PCs have Expertise i a 28 point buy game with half the party as clerics of one stripe or another, they've spent an awful lot of points on Int when it doesn't do a lot for their characters. Are players dumping Con? That would go a long way to explaining the death toll.

But what to do?

I've offered them an NPC 'healing bitch' - they don't want one

I've offered to start rolling behind a screen but they feel that that would cheapen their victories.

I'm taking combatants out of many of the fights, and having some of them use suboptimal attack forms (eg last night's vampire - +8 to hit with his mace, doing d8+5. +2 to hit with slam, doing same damage plus level drain. I went with the latter, knowing they had at least one potion of lesser restoration).

I really don't want to be a killer DM- I'm not on a power trip and I don't have an axe to grind against any of my players. I like nothing better than finishing a campaign with the same PCs that started it. I'd really welcome any suggestions on how to get them to function more as a fighting unit.

One possibility: give them a match against their dopplegangers (NPCs with similar builds and levels) and run the NPCs as a team. If the players see the bad guy rogue readying his attack for when the fighter gives him a flank instead of attacking without sneak dice, having the fighter move into a nonflanking position and then having to take an AoO to get the flank next round, they may be inclined to try it themselves.

 

[Legildur]

....one of those 8 sided d4s (that people use to avoid having caltrops in their dice bag)...

Sorry to pick on this one small and insignificant element of an otherwise valuable post, but I didn't know these existed! I'm going to go and buy 2 this afternoon for use with my spiked chain wielding half-orc Bbr1/Ftr3/Clr3 (Luck and Strength)! I HATE trying to roll d4s.

 

[Quartz]

My basic concerns are that I will form a magnet for spells, having only one good save (even that will fall behind those who multiclass), and also those attacks which either automatically hit (I had a dwarven paladin once with good AC and saves, was brought down easily via ray of enfeeblement and magic missile, which was annoying) or are so good as to easily hit (ie the best the enemy has to offer).

I suggest you take two levels of Monk or Knight or both. Don't think of the Monk as the kung fu master but as the discipined warrior.

Over the longer term, if you're starting as Fighter 4, I suggest taking a 2 level dip to Monk, then fighter for 4 more levels (for the feats), then continue as a fighter or Dwarven Defender. Ftr 8 / Mk 2 / DD 10 is nasty.

If you're concerned about the others taking hits, think about the Knight class and the Knight's Challenge ability. Ftr 4 / Mk 2 / Kt 4 / DD10 is also nasty. Note also the effect of the Knight on the surrounding terrain. That's 118 HP before Con, +19 BAB, and base saves of +15 / +8 / +15, and as long as you keep to Mithril Breastplate, you have Evasion.

 

[Xini]

This would be a good build. I would consider a tower shield, though, instead of a heavy shield. This would give you an AC of 23 when combined with Dwarven Battleplate. You won't deal quite as much damage as you could with a two-handed weapon, but you'd be pretty hard to hit. If you can manage a 12 Dex and the Dodge feat, you are looking at an AC of 25 without any magical help.

Hmmm I wasn't thinking of dodge but rather heavy armour optimisation (or what ever the races of stone book feat is called) and the improved shield feat from PHBII (you can tell I'm good with specifics no ).

I'm surprised you suggest the tower shield. I realise that this would give me a higher AC but would it not also reduce my offensive potential? I did consider an extreme shield but both of these we're discarded as the improved shield feat won't work with them and neither will shield ward which is my only hope of getting a decent touch AC versus all those nasty no save spells in 3.5!

Xini, if your'e the one with a sense of tactics and teamwork, YOU should be playing the party cleric. Seriously. Take over as party leader. Come up w/plans and give orders. Let ineffective/selfish characters die.

LOL! I get enough stick trying to suggest that our Ranger/ Cleric uses his healing wand more often. As he puts it "I told you I wasn't going to play a healing b**ch!!".

4th level Dwarf fighter? Spiked chain. Seriously.

Really though I can't see a Dwarf wielding a spiked chain. The weapon is very wierd and probably wouldn't work in the real world. I'm afraid I continue to dislike the weapon despite it's advantages just as I refuse to ever have a character wielding a scythe unless he happens to be Death himself. It just doesn't look right to me.

Thanks for the idea though. I do admit it makes an awesome combination.

Both of these facts explain a lot. Also, the original poster noted that the cleric archer is a multiclass ranger/cleric which doesn't help matters--in terms of straight-up fighting power, a ranger/cleric is generally a few steps behind a straightforward cleric archer.

I think the level of ranger is to help qualify for the exalted harper class.

Kinda makes you think when an exalted cleric doesn't want to heal people :\

Do the players enjoy this? If not, you should have an out of character talk about getting some more unity among the players.

I think the problem is not one of "do they complain about this" but rather "what do they NOT complain about"

On the other hand, if your players enjoy the kind of every man for himself mentality, but don't enjoy getting reamed, you still might want to briefly point out to them that, they would have a much easier time of things if they worked together more and that the individualism that they enjoy might need to be mitigated a bit so that it doesn't produce the defeat that they don't enjoy.

Yes I've often pointed out that we get too much of "but I designed my character around X, why wouldn't he do X?". The concept of working in a team still escapes them.

I mentioned this before in passing, but another thing to note here. If multiple PCs have Expertise i a 28 point buy game with half the party as clerics of one stripe or another, they've spent an awful lot of points on Int when it doesn't do a lot for their characters. Are players dumping Con? That would go a long way to explaining the death toll.

CON, CHA the first two casualties whenever characters are made. All to enter the race of who can hurt the monster the most and the quickest.
(Honestly it can get like a western with magic somedays. The high intiative PCs howl into combat like banshees and no amount of plans to hold back or buff will stay them. The only time it doesn't happen is against monsters which are known to be deadly or those with grapple capabilities.)

One possibility: give them a match against their dopplegangers (NPCs with similar builds and levels) and run the NPCs as a team. If the players see the bad guy rogue readying his attack for when the fighter gives him a flank instead of attacking without sneak dice, having the fighter move into a nonflanking position and then having to take an AoO to get the flank next round, they may be inclined to try it themselves.

Hmmm isn't that like asking for a TPK?

We do try to plan a coordinate but each time some person or other decides to think (a dangerous act which I have chastised them for repeatedly). This thinking most often leads to them "deviating" from the plan (read ignoring it) and then the plan falls to pieces as more people join in the freedom revolution and do their own thing. Either that or someon refuses to do their part because their injured or something and as such instead of just having to worry about that one persons injuries we then have to worry, and pay for the healing of, about the whole parties injuries as the plan disintegrates like a goblin versus Devlin Stormweaver!

Oh and the whole healing wand usage, there's a simple explanaition. We bought them for the clerics as a party. As such it seems that they now consider that to be healing and their own spells to be for other things. If you need healing (even right at the start of the day) then out comes the wands. Problem is that there's little we can do about it.

All these factors are edging me further down the path of heavy armour, stout shield and big hittie stick. All they'd have to do is keep me operating and I can hold back the big bad whilst they all do their own thing. I'm used to this role. It was the role of my Bladesinger. The most fun I had with that guy was when I pulled out of combat once and the party virtually fled the field of battle!!!

I suggest you take two levels of Monk or Knight or both. Don't think of the Monk as the kung fu master but as the discipined warrior.

Unfortunately both are on the banned list.
Monk - They pray in monastaries and don't wander round the countryside kicking dragons.
(I agree, they're hardly classic western fantasy and as such don't suit our game well though your interpretation of the effect of the class is worth taking a second look at them. Best ask Ellie )
Knight - I think the special abilities of this class will just cause things to slow down even more. I take your point on the saves but I'm finding that I want more and more feats, the only choice being fighter from that perspective.

Hopefully we're going to have some useful discussions this coming Saturday evening and get the new character sorted out and also have some frank discussions where I don't care if people do get their knickers in a twist, we're having it out.|

 

[Veril]

Best thing is to educate people, by showing them how to do it. The DM should hit the party with (almost) duplicates of themselves, but make them work together. point it out when they are doing.

Have the NPC party leader call out actions - say them at the table - then have the team execute it.

Have them buff up, and do it where the characters can see it. Shield of Faith+Bulls Strength on a "new" dwarven fighter. Bless the NPC party, Bane the PC's.
"Buff up the tank", "group buffs/debuffs". That's 2 rounds from each of the clerics.

Have the arcane casters use grease or other hindering spells while everyone preps, then switch to using Magic Missiles or other ranged stuff. Concentrate everything on dropping one person at a time call out - "kill the healers" in the NPC action and then everyone does that.

The NPC party should work to make sure the rogue gets sneak attacks in, delaying or moving as needed.

Show the players what teamwork is all about.

 

[Xini]

One thing with all this discussion of tactics and stuff. We've been working off the premise that when you cast spells then this cuts into (at least) the amount of time you have available to talk/ give orders. Compound this with the idea that it would be really difficult for a fighter type to order the casters to cast a particular spell (as they don't know the requisit lingo, like when managers try to instruct programmers and walk away confused ).

So if the fighter is unable to instruct the spell casters and the casters must alternate inbetween shouting orders and casting... no one wants the job.

Perhaps I should take some ranks in knowldege arcana or something? Mind you our Wizard is the best tactician at the moment but he's not happy because the Ranger/ Cleric has taken the lead. The politics is killing things at the moment.

 

[Schmoe]

Personally my concept is a stout Dwarven fighter with a Dwarven Waraxe, Dwarven Battleplate and a heavy steel shield. All three moving up to adamantine and spiked as and when I can afford it (I wonder if spiked adamantine armour would count as crampons whilst climbing? ).

Feat progression would be aiming for plenty of weapon focus and weapon spec (I'm thinking power attack over expertise for using up this excessive to hit roll versus easy to hit baddies). Also I want to concentrate on being really good in heavy armour and able to use a shield with great proficiency.

My basic concerns are that I will form a magnet for spells, having only one good save (even that will fall behind those who multiclass), and also those attacks which either automatically hit (I had a dwarven paladin once with good AC and saves, was brought down easily via ray of enfeeblement and magic missile, which was annoying) or are so good as to easily hit (ie the best the enemy has to offer).

Ideally I will be facing the best the opponents have to offer in terms of a melee, protecting the party, whilst our spellcasters (ie the rest of the group) engage their spellcasters. I'm kinda hoping that whilst I concentrate on cutting down opponents and defeanding our line the "real threats" in the party will dispatch the enemy.

If you are serious about playing a straight fighter (which I think is very cool, btw), you really want to discuss some of the feats in the PHB2 with your DM. That book has some great options to make the tank concept more viable. For example, Shield Ward allows you to apply your shield bonus to touch AC. It won't make you a super-munchkin, but it makes you a little less likely to be completely hosed by touch spells.