The Role of the Fighter in a Party

[Sinfire Titan]

Well, if we're talking CR 10 vs level 10, then solo, you'd expect to win 50% of the time.

Not really. If the CR system is to be believed (and it's not), a party of 4 ECL 10 Characters using the standard formation (S&B Fighter, Lockpicker, Healbot, and Blaster) is supposed to be able to beat a CR 10 Encounter 100% of the time by expending 25% of their daily resources. Removing one of those characters should reduce the odds of victory by 25%, so a 10v10 solo is expected to be one-sided in favor of the encounter.

Again, this is assuming the CR system is accurate (which we know it isn't).

[midnight_v]

Well, if we're talking CR 10 vs level 10, then solo, you'd expect to win 50% of the time.

Not really. If the CR system is to be believed (and it's not), a party of 4 ECL 10 Characters using the standard formation (S&B Fighter, Lockpicker, Healbot, and Blaster) is supposed to be able to beat a CR 10 Encounter 100% of the time by expending 25% of their daily resources. Removing one of those characters should reduce the odds of victory by 25%, so a 10v10 solo is expected to be one-sided in favor of the encounter.

Again, this is assuming the CR system is accurate (which we know it isn't).

I don't know where its proved anymore but Robby's correct, in some way, but I'm going to say...
Its irrelavant, discussing who has the correct interpretation of the CR system is egregious "dick talk", since we all agree it's broke.
We know that shit wasn't really playtested beyond the first half of the game so either we can really redifine that shit if we want.
I actually advocate someone sitting down and Re-evaluating the Cr system, the smart thing to do would be to evaulate the qualites of monsters in and of themselves and  and assigning a point total to them then deciding then that between X point total and Y point total, would equal a certain CR.
People are too busy trying to "win" these endless debates to actually fix anything.

[Mooncrow]

Spellcraft actually has an interesting system for that, and is probably a step in the right direction.  (not that I'm saying its actually balanced or anything, but in theory it has some good ideas)  It would at least be nice to establish a baseline, and from there be able to adjust as needed according to the actual party composition. 

I would have killed for something like that when we first switched over 

[Basket Burner]

It really depends on how you play and the party you have... if you've got a god wizard even 10 dpr is enough at level 10. But it won't give much satisfaction to the players I suppose.

If you were only doing 10, the crippled enemies would likely get uncrippled and start killing people. Or not get crippled in time, and you can't cover for him.

Still, 75 dpr at level 10 sounds about right, maybe a bit low, but no too much. Ofc I mean 75dpr considering that an attack or two missed.
That of course is true with a complete party with heals and battlefield control.
In my case the party has lots of heals, stealth, mobility and battlefild control, but rarely we see a character doing more than 100 damage in a round, REALLY rarely, but the party is working in an awesome way against higher level encounters even with the """"low"""" dps, by disrupting all enemies we face and slowly killing them

At level 10? You need to be putting out a lot more than 75 a round if damage is all you do, and it likely is. Heals aren't going to counter incoming damage, so that just leaves taking them out quickly.

The main problem though is how few chances you have to do it because not only do enemies have more HP than you, they do more damage than you for the same degree of effort both absolutely and relatively. That Fire Giant is doing 75 a round when you only have 89. Even if some miss, you die in 2 rounds. And that means it has to die faster. The only ways to be faster than two rounds is to kill it in 1, or to kill it in 2 and always go first.

Well, if we're talking CR 10 vs level 10, then solo, you'd expect to win 50% of the time.

If this is one of those four-a-day speed bump encounters, then it's only supposed to be a minor drain on resources, and you figure you have three other party members picking up any slack.

Which means you'd have to two round it to have even a 1% chance of victory.

If your party is there, sure you might get through it, but it won't be because of your own character's contributions. Unless of course you can get your damage to the point of making a difference.

[RobbyPants]

The main problem though is how few chances you have to do it because not only do enemies have more HP than you, they do more damage than you for the same degree of effort both absolutely and relatively. That Fire Giant is doing 75 a round when you only have 89. Even if some miss, you die in 2 rounds. And that means it has to die faster. The only ways to be faster than two rounds is to kill it in 1, or to kill it in 2 and always go first.

Well, if we're talking CR 10 vs level 10, then solo, you'd expect to win 50% of the time.

If this is one of those four-a-day speed bump encounters, then it's only supposed to be a minor drain on resources, and you figure you have three other party members picking up any slack.

Which means you'd have to two round it to have even a 1% chance of victory.

If your party is there, sure you might get through it, but it won't be because of your own character's contributions. Unless of course you can get your damage to the point of making a difference.

Where's the 1% coming from? I thought this was based on the fighter doing enough damage to two-shot the fire giant. Your idea was in order for this to work, you either have to go first or hope the fire giant misses enough that you survive two rounds. I don't see how you can only get 1% out of that. At a minimum, you probably have a 50% chance to go first, all other things being equal (either side missing on attacks).

That seems about spot on in a SGT point of view (50% chance of success to solo a same-CR fight).

[Basket Burner]

The main problem though is how few chances you have to do it because not only do enemies have more HP than you, they do more damage than you for the same degree of effort both absolutely and relatively. That Fire Giant is doing 75 a round when you only have 89. Even if some miss, you die in 2 rounds. And that means it has to die faster. The only ways to be faster than two rounds is to kill it in 1, or to kill it in 2 and always go first.

Well, if we're talking CR 10 vs level 10, then solo, you'd expect to win 50% of the time.

If this is one of those four-a-day speed bump encounters, then it's only supposed to be a minor drain on resources, and you figure you have three other party members picking up any slack.

Which means you'd have to two round it to have even a 1% chance of victory.

If your party is there, sure you might get through it, but it won't be because of your own character's contributions. Unless of course you can get your damage to the point of making a difference.

Where's the 1% coming from? I thought this was based on the fighter doing enough damage to two-shot the fire giant. Your idea was in order for this to work, you either have to go first or hope the fire giant misses enough that you survive two rounds. I don't see how you can only get 1% out of that. At a minimum, you probably have a 50% chance to go first, all other things being equal (either side missing on attacks).

That seems about spot on in a SGT point of view (50% chance of success to solo a same-CR fight).

It two rounds you. You have to two round it to have even a 1% chance of victory. Otherwise, you have a 0% chance of victory. Understand now?

If you two round it, you die in each and every combat you don't go first. Literally, win init or die.

If you one round it, you will generally survive combats, which is good considering you probably don't want a different character for every gaming session.

Because you need to do so much damage, and have so little time to do it in, there are only a few ways of actually doing that.

[Solo]

Well, if we're talking CR 10 vs level 10, then solo, you'd expect to win 50% of the time.

Not really. If the CR system is to be believed (and it's not), a party of 4 ECL 10 Characters using the standard formation (S&B Fighter, Lockpicker, Healbot, and Blaster) is supposed to be able to beat a CR 10 Encounter 100% of the time by expending 25% of their daily resources. Removing one of those characters should reduce the odds of victory by 25%, so a 10v10 solo is expected to be one-sided in favor of the encounter.

Again, this is assuming the CR system is accurate (which we know it isn't).

Just for clarification: "25% of daily resources" should not include one of the four party members, correct?

[ImperatorK]

Well, if we're talking CR 10 vs level 10, then solo, you'd expect to win 50% of the time.

Not really. If the CR system is to be believed (and it's not), a party of 4 ECL 10 Characters using the standard formation (S&B Fighter, Lockpicker, Healbot, and Blaster) is supposed to be able to beat a CR 10 Encounter 100% of the time by expending 25% of their daily resources. Removing one of those characters should reduce the odds of victory by 25%, so a 10v10 solo is expected to be one-sided in favor of the encounter.

Again, this is assuming the CR system is accurate (which we know it isn't).

Just for clarification: "25% of daily resources" should not include one of the four party members, correct?

Lol. Depends on the level. Once Ressurection is available, death is just an inconvenience.

[veekie]

You could stretch it out by not allowing the Giant to full attack you. The two round estimate assumes both parties are base to base and trading full attacks. If it goes first, it must charge(or hurl rocks but the accuracy on that is ehhhh), which gives it a single attack advantage, which is made up when the fighter delivers a full attack, then takes a full attack and delivers another.

More important is to make the first hit count for more on the fighter, which is why uberchargers or initiators rock so hard, on top of the massive damage. They get to do something close to a full attack in magnitude.

[Basket Burner]

Just for clarification: "25% of daily resources" should not include one of the four party members, correct?

That was a good one. It is supposed to be 20 though. Otherwise every day consumes 100%, meaning new day, new party. Everyone dies.

You could stretch it out by not allowing the Giant to full attack you. The two round estimate assumes both parties are base to base and trading full attacks. If it goes first, it must charge(or hurl rocks but the accuracy on that is ehhhh), which gives it a single attack advantage, which is made up when the fighter delivers a full attack, then takes a full attack and delivers another.

More important is to make the first hit count for more on the fighter, which is why uberchargers or initiators rock so hard, on top of the massive damage. They get to do something close to a full attack in magnitude.

The problem with that is that if you are a full attacker, most means of preventing them from full attacking you also prevent you from full attacking them. It's the Spring Attack problem, in that you shut yourself off. If you're not, then you can move and be useful in the same round. Either way it's a point against the Fighter, and anyone else stuck in full round action land as they don't have any real choice but to play the stand still and swing game. It's the reason why abilities like Pounce so you can move and still full attack are required, though those only stop you from getting full attacked back by one rounding the target.

[RobbyPants]

It two rounds you. You have to two round it to have even a 1% chance of victory. Otherwise, you have a 0% chance of victory. Understand now?

If you two round it, you die in each and every combat you don't go first. Literally, win init or die.

If you one round it, you will generally survive combats, which is good considering you probably don't want a different character for every gaming session.

Because you need to do so much damage, and have so little time to do it in, there are only a few ways of actually doing that.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the initial premise. I thought the idea was the fighter being discussed could kill the fire giant in two rounds and the fire giant could kill the fighter in two rounds. That's be 50% on one fight. I thought that was the basis for the SGT.

As for surviving combats, yes, I agree, which is why at the actual game table, you don't go around soloing equal CR monsters (iterative probabilities and all); you go after them with a group of several adventurers.


Of course, as everyone knows, the actual CR system doesn't work this cleanly, but I thought that was the base concept. Or did I still miss something?

[Basket Burner]

It two rounds you. You have to two round it to have even a 1% chance of victory. Otherwise, you have a 0% chance of victory. Understand now?

If you two round it, you die in each and every combat you don't go first. Literally, win init or die.

If you one round it, you will generally survive combats, which is good considering you probably don't want a different character for every gaming session.

Because you need to do so much damage, and have so little time to do it in, there are only a few ways of actually doing that.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the initial premise. I thought the idea was the fighter being discussed could kill the fire giant in two rounds and the fire giant could kill the fighter in two rounds. That's be 50% on one fight. I thought that was the basis for the SGT.

As for surviving combats, yes, I agree, which is why at the actual game table, you don't go around soloing equal CR monsters (iterative probabilities and all); you go after them with a group of several adventurers.


Of course, as everyone knows, the actual CR system doesn't work this cleanly, but I thought that was the base concept. Or did I still miss something?

I understood the part about the Fire Giant two rounding any given member of the party, with the Fighter chosen as the example. I don't think anyone else pointed out what the party needs to do other than myself, so I did.

The problem with the SGT's set of assumptions is that it assumes that every encounter exists in a vacuum. It doesn't. You take your character and fight various things with the same character. If you die you don't just mark down a loss, you lose quite a lot of gold and XP. That means the bar is actually higher, because while the SGT does model the assumptions the designers had rather well... the designers don't understand their own game very well.

One part of this really stands out though.

As for surviving combats, yes, I agree, which is why at the actual game table, you don't go around soloing equal CR monsters

That... is not entirely true. A normal fight, that you get half the time is 4 level 10s vs one Fire Giant. But sometimes you fight 2, 3, 4, or even more of them at the same time. There are 4 of you, so 4 on 4 does mean each of you need to do one Fire Giant's worth of work by yourselves to be doing your part.

And even just 2 of them, they both attack the same person and that person dies. The only way to stop this is to take out at least one on round 1 before it moves.

Fire Giants aren't even an especially powerful CR 10, in fact they're rather weak. Even they impose some rather strict time limits on combat length.

[ImperatorK]

4 fire giants aren't a level-appropriate encounter for 4 10th level characters.

[X-Codes]

4 fire giants aren't a level-appropriate encounter for 4 10th level characters.

IIRC, that's EL 14, so it's not level-appropriate, but it's not out of the ballpark for a party to encounter.

Of course, Fire Giants are made to go toe-to-toe with Fighters and come out better for it.  Of course, if the party Wizard casts Boreal Wind... That's 40 DPR on each giant, plus the Giants can't move towards the caster.

[RobbyPants]

4 fire giants aren't a level-appropriate encounter for 4 10th level characters.

4 fire giants aren't a level-appropriate encounter for 4 10th level characters.

IIRC, that's EL 14, so it's not level-appropriate, but it's not out of the ballpark for a party to encounter.

Of course, Fire Giants are made to go toe-to-toe with Fighters and come out better for it.  Of course, if the party Wizard casts Boreal Wind... That's 40 DPR on each giant, plus the Giants can't move towards the caster.

I'm too lazy to open my DMG, but I'm pretty sure that a notable percentage of encounters are supposed to fall into the "overpowering range", which is party level +4. It's something small, like 5%, but it is a non-zero number.

Now, what you're supposed to do in those encounters depends on the situation. Running is prudent (if it's even possible), but if you have a well optimized group and you didn't get surprised/ambushed, it might not be that bad of a fight. Of course, if you're not prepared, or if you've already fought earlier that day, it could just be a death sentence for the party.

At least that's what I think Basket Burner is referencing when he talks about fighting several fire giants at level 10.

[ImperatorK]

Robby said "you don't go around soloing equal CR monsters". BB said "That... is not entirely true."
It is true. If you have an encounter where there's one level-appropriate enemy per PC it's not soloing. You have your teammates and you can focus-fire on one enemy. BB insists that the fighter absolutely must be able to one-shot his opponent. He doesn't, becasue he has teammates that can either finish the enemy that he attacked, or can soften the enemy and then the Fighter can finish the deed.

Or am I misunderstanding what's going on here?

[X-Codes]

Robby said "you don't go around soloing equal CR monsters". BB said "That... is not entirely true."
It is true. If you have an encounter where there's one level-appropriate enemy per PC it's not soloing. You have your teammates and you can focus-fire on one enemy. BB insists that the fighter absolutely must be able to one-shot his opponent. He doesn't, becasue he has teammates that can either finish the enemy that he attacked, or can soften the enemy and then the Fighter can finish the deed.

Or am I misunderstanding what's going on here?

The inevitable counter-argument is that the fighter then auto-dies because he has to be able to handle 4 auto-attacks.

Which is, of course, not the case if the party plays smart.  Fire Giants have +4 Reflex saves and +9 Will Saves, and the battery of 4th- and 5th-level spells that target those saves is impressive.  Hell, their Touch AC is a miserable 8.  A Split Ray of Dizziness absolutely neuters two of the giants, no save.

[Basket Burner]

4 fire giants aren't a level-appropriate encounter for 4 10th level characters.

4 fire giants aren't a level-appropriate encounter for 4 10th level characters.

IIRC, that's EL 14, so it's not level-appropriate, but it's not out of the ballpark for a party to encounter.

Of course, Fire Giants are made to go toe-to-toe with Fighters and come out better for it.  Of course, if the party Wizard casts Boreal Wind... That's 40 DPR on each giant, plus the Giants can't move towards the caster.

I'm too lazy to open my DMG, but I'm pretty sure that a notable percentage of encounters are supposed to fall into the "overpowering range", which is party level +4. It's something small, like 5%, but it is a non-zero number.

2 Fire Giants is level +2. 3 is level +3, 4 is level +4. Levels +1-4 occur 15% of the time. Not only is it level appropriate, it has an almost 50% chance to occur on any given day. Perhaps not those specific enemies, but an encounter along the same parameters.

Now, what you're supposed to do in those encounters depends on the situation. Running is prudent (if it's even possible), but if you have a well optimized group and you didn't get surprised/ambushed, it might not be that bad of a fight. Of course, if you're not prepared, or if you've already fought earlier that day, it could just be a death sentence for the party.

What you are supposed to do is beat them, as you have an almost even chance of fighting something like this every single day. Doing that is a matter of:

2 giants: Take out at least one on the first round before it moves, otherwise one PC dies, and one PC continues to die every round until one drops, then one PC/2 rounds until the other drops.
3 giants: Take out at least two on the first round before they move, as they can sweep the entire party in 3 rounds.
4 giants: Take all of them out on the first round, otherwise half the party dies on round 1 and the other half on round 2.

There are a number of ways to do that, but if you're playing a Fighter the only one you can do is to do at least 150 a round, that way you can kill one a round by yourself.

At least that's what I think Basket Burner is referencing when he talks about fighting several fire giants at level 10.

More or less. Then consider these are weak CR 10s, and entirely unmodified. For all the talk of "low op", as if that phrase actually had its intended meaning the monsters have no trouble performing their intended roles, which involves killing the party.

[midnight_v]

Hmm... one of the ideas that I always asked in the old discussions was "Would the party be better off, with another class in this slot instead." a lot of time the answer was and overwhelming "yes"...

I don't wanna seem like I'm moving the goal post here... and I'm not trying mind you but, the 75dpr per full attack thing is in a bubble, but honestly we honestly don't calculate anything else that might be being done besides damage. . . tripping, stunning, dazing, nausea, karmic striking, attacks via manuever, deny opposing full attacks, via moving out of range, or some form combination of ac & miss chance or whatever. The idea is that the Pc's get this thing and a Fire Giant wouldn't have that. What the fire giant has is immense strength and more hitdice, and a pool of hp.

Ultimately, basketburner is right about a LOT of what he's saying
Because...
even BESIDES all that "potential" the spread of enemies are really brutal for the fighter.

Animated Object, Colossal
Brass Dragon, Young adult Large Dragon (Fire)
Couatl Large Outsider (Native)
Cryohydra, Nine-Headed Huge Magical Beast (Cold)
Demon, Bebilith Huge Outsider (Chaotic, Extraplanar, Evil)
Formian Myrmarch Large Outsider (Lawful, Extraplanar)
Giant, Fire Large Giant (Fire)
Golem, Clay Large Construct
Hydra, Eleven-Headed Huge Magical Beast
Monstrous Scorpion, Gargantuan Vermin
Naga, Guardian Large Aberration
Pyrohydra, Nine-Headed Huge Magical Beast (Fire)
Rakshasa Medium Outsider (Native)
Red Dragon, Juvenile Large Dragon (Fire)
Salamander, Noble Large Outsider (Extraplanar, Fire)
Silver Dragon, Juvenile Large Dragon (Cold)
White Dragon, Adult Large Dragon (Cold)

So... back to the begining
What is the fighters (melee guy) role in those fights?
From where I'm sitting the melee guy isn't the one who answers any of those questions.
Its the FC (Full Caster) that answers those questions/threats, if those questions are to be answered at all.
I have to yield the DPR arguement, I guess. The challenges there, that are melee's are too hard core for a fighter to melee, the ones that are casters... don't "HAVE" to confront him in melee at all, unless the melee has some highly specialized detection and damamge delivery system.

Those are the fights. Only high suffiecently optimized melee builds need apply, those that are can either kill in 1 round or incapacitate for multiple rounds, because the monsters are doing just that. Or rather, they don't have to kill you but once, when the monster kills the fighter and dies to the rest of party... there's always another monster.

[Basket Burner]

Hmm... one of the ideas that I always asked in the old discussions was "Would the party be better off, with another class in this slot instead." a lot of time the answer was and overwhelming "yes"...

There's a quote around here. I can't find it again, but it says something to the effect of "If the most logical course of action for the rest of the party to take is to kill or abandon your character, you have went too far." It's fitting. If you have a damage dealer that cannot deal damage, anything else would be better. Nothing would be better.

I don't wanna seem like I'm moving the goal post here... and I'm not trying mind you but, the 75dpr per full attack thing is in a bubble, but honestly we honestly don't calculate anything else that might be being done besides damage. . . tripping, stunning, dazing, nausea, karmic striking, attacks via manuever, deny opposing full attacks, via moving out of range, or some form combination of ac & miss chance or whatever. The idea is that the Pc's get this thing and a Fire Giant wouldn't have that. What the fire giant has is immense strength and more hitdice, and a pool of hp.

When it comes down to it, the non caster guy is going to be doing damage or weak area control. I've implied this but haven't explicitly stated it. When you need area control, you need strong area control. Stunning would be good, except any means a non caster has to do it has a low DC. Dazing is good, and actually does have a good DC. Given people's reactions to saying that all non casters should be using a two handed weapon I don't think they'd react so well to everything being a Boomerang Dazer. There's no means of getting out nausea with anything approaching a good DC. They don't get much in the way of miss chances, or defenses either. And the rest of those are just damage.