# Characters with Pounce! ALSO: Fair price for Pounce?



## Mistah J (Nov 16, 2009)

Hey all!

So, in one of the games I play in we have two characters with the TWF chain. One is a halfling rogue with the Invisible Blade PrC and all sorts of feinting, sneak attack-granting bonuses.

The other is a ranger. One whose looking to be in the style of a primal, or savage, type warrior. So to help him, differentiate from the rogue, he has things like Two-Weapon Rend.

What I would like to offer him is the Pounce ability. Does anyone out there have any ideas on how a PC character could pick this up?

Feats, Magic Items work best but a PrC might be ok too.

Thanks!

EDIT: My next post below talks about the the second question: How powerful a feat do you think the Pounce ability is?


----------



## Theroc (Nov 16, 2009)

I believe Complete Champion has a variant of Barbarian which grants Pounce at some point.  Additionally, from Magic of Incarnum, the Sphinx Claws Soulmeld when bound to the Hands Chakra allows a Full Attack with all natural weapons at the end of a charge.  Granted, the chain TWF isn't a natural weapon, perhaps you could houserule something in.

I believe the Magic of Incarnum path would cost 2-3 feats.
One to get the Soulmeld, and one to be able to bind it to the hands chakra.

I realize that wasn't the most helpful thing, but it's all I can come up with atm.


----------



## Dragonwriter (Nov 16, 2009)

Complete Champion's Lion Totem Barbarian (I think it was...) gives Pounce at level 1.

Tome of Battle offers the Tiger Claw maneuver Pouncing Strike, which can be used through an item, or through levels in Warblade or Swordsage.

Player's Handbook 2 offers a more limited Pounce-like feat, Two-Weapon Pounce, though it only gives 1 attack with each hand, and you lose the +2 attack for charging.

If I remember correctly, the Feral template from Savage Species (not sure, as I don't own the book) gave Pounce, though I could easily be mistaken on that.


----------



## Dross (Nov 16, 2009)

Mistah J said:


> Hey all!
> 
> So, in one of the games I play in we have two characters with the TWF chain. One is a halfling rogue with the Invisible Blade PrC and all sorts of feinting, sneak attack-granting bonuses.
> 
> ...




Two-Weapon Pounce is in the PHB2 (along with Two-Weapon Rend) as part of a charge. he can qualify for it now.

RotW Catfolk Pounce allows a full attack V a charged, flat-footed opponent. (you need to be a catfolk tho')

If you want (I'm not sure I do) you can always make another feat above 2WP to allow a full attack on a charge. If so think about the 2W Rend damage.


----------



## Mistah J (Nov 16, 2009)

Thanks for the answers everyone.

In my search to find a solution, I am pleased to say I have found several. This brings up a new question though. 

In addition to what people listed above, I found a few more feats and other ways to get the pounce ability, or something like it. These include:

Two Forgotten Realm regional feats. They require you to be from the right region, you must take it at 1st level (and one requires you to have the rage ability) but they both grant the full pounce attack.

Another is Dire Charge from the Epic Level Handbook. For this one you must be Epic but you get the full pounce attack.


My point is that there is a HUGE swing in the requirements needed to get this ability. So now I am wondering, what exactly is Pounce worth in terms of feats? How powerful is it? 

What do you think the prerequisites should be?


Thanks


----------



## Dandu (Nov 16, 2009)

Dragonwriter said:


> If I remember correctly, the Feral template from Savage Species (not sure, as I don't own the book) gave Pounce, though I could easily be mistaken on that.



It does.



Mistah J said:


> My point is that there is a HUGE swing in the requirements needed to get this ability. So now I am wondering, what exactly is Pounce worth in terms of feats?




One feat, Martial Study, gives access to the maneuver Pouncing Strike, usable once per encounter.

But why are we dithering around with feats? I can give you a solution that the player can use right now.

Open the Spell Compendium and open it to page 133. You should find this:



> Lion''s Charge
> Transmutation
> Druid 3, Ranger 2
> Components: V
> ...


----------



## Shin Okada (Nov 16, 2009)

Mistah J said:


> My point is that there is a HUGE swing in the requirements needed to get this ability. So now I am wondering, what exactly is Pounce worth in terms of feats? How powerful is it?
> 
> What do you think the prerequisites should be?




There often is a huge swing in the requirements to get the same thing. Say, getting +3 additional HPs, +1 attack bonus, +1 dodge bonus to AC, making a weapon attack into a touch attack, and so on.

Now, there are so many ways to get pounce ability already. Why do you need to re-estimate the prerequisites?

By the way, I guess the said Rogue Invisible Blade will not be benefited much from pounce ability. How often will he be in the position wich allows him to flank an opponent via charging? And even an invisible blade can use uncanny feint once per round.

And as already pointed out, a Ranger can simply use Lion's Pounce spell. If he want to use it often, buy a wand of Lion's Pounce and Casting Glove (Magic Compendium).


----------



## Runestar (Nov 17, 2009)

MIC does have a few magic items which allow the wearer to move as a swift action (thus still allowing him to make a full attack).


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Nov 17, 2009)

FWIW, the barbarian variant is fairly broken since you get it at level 1 with no need to advance Barbarian afterwards.  And the Feral template is abso-freakin'-lutely-never-allowing-it-in-my-game-in-a-million-years broken.


----------



## Dandu (Nov 17, 2009)

Shin Okada said:


> And as already pointed out, a Ranger can simply use Lion's Pounce spell. If he want to use it often, buy a wand of Lion's Pounce and Casting Glove (Magic Compendium).




Or get Wand Chambers installed in your weapons. 100 gp per chamber.



StreamOfTheSky said:


> FWIW, the barbarian variant is fairly broken since you get it at level 1 with no need to advance Barbarian afterwards.  And the Feral template is abso-freakin'-lutely-never-allowing-it-in-my-game-in-a-million-years broken.




Still more balanced than even a core only full caster.

Come on, isn't it time to throw melee a bone?

You can't even use pounce until 6th level. By then, you need it, or some other powerful option, to keep up.


----------



## Runestar (Nov 17, 2009)

> My point is that there is a HUGE swing in the requirements needed to get this ability. So now I am wondering, what exactly is Pounce worth in terms of feats? How powerful is it?




My guess is that wotc themselves can't decide what exactly it should be worth either. Pounce was initially an epic feat (implying that it was originally believed to be very powerful), now a class feature (so it is not that game breaking as previously envisioned?).



> One feat, Martial Study, gives access to the maneuver Pouncing Strike, usable once per encounter.




You would have to be lv18 to qualify though, and it requires 2 more tiger claw maneuvers, meaning you need to burn yet another 2 feats unless you multiclass in warblade or swordsage.


----------



## Dandu (Nov 18, 2009)

Meh, moot point considering the ranger has access to it via a spell.


----------



## Freakohollik (Nov 19, 2009)

I'd say pounce is not particularly strong. Two reasons. First off, of the iterative attacks, only the second one has a chance. Your second off hand attack may have a chance if you're a two weapon fighter. But if you're going for a strategy that revolves around a lot of hits, rapid shot and many shot are better. Second, there much better ways to optimize your charge. They usually revolve around max power attack, leap attack, and some way to offset the attack penalty.

All that said, unless you foresee some ridiculous power gaming abuse of pounce, just let him have it.

For the sake of completeness, the Lion of Talsid PrC from the Book of Exalted Deeds gives you pounce. It is probably the least optimal method of getting it.


----------



## akbearfoot (Nov 19, 2009)

I don't agree with the notion that giving melee characters Full attacks nearly 100% of the time is remotely balanced.   I don't really think it should be an epic feat...but IMO it's worth at least 5x what a ring of evasion is worth in terms of power. 

For that matter,  the 'only the first iterative has a chance' concept.  Since 3e has been around that has rarely ever been my experience.  Melee oriented characters just never seem to have trouble hitting if they have halfway decent buffs.  Granted, it is still weak compared to a no spells barred game where there is no common sense restrictions on spells from the SpC/splatbooks.  But I would like to think most games have some measure of balance applied to them.  


Lion totem barbarian is probably the single most abusive thing in the book it was printed in.  If not the worst thing,  then it is certainly in the top few.


The ranger spell is limited by both the rangers very small allotment of spells each day, and the fact that it also consumes his swift action every time he uses it,  thus limiting item activations,  other spells, etc...

I'll make an assumption that the character who the OP is considering the ability for has taken the 2-W fighting tree...actually I think they have to have them in order to have 2-W rend.  And they are at least to the point where they are at 3 attacks a round.  So thats 6 with a 2-w user.  That means that you're giving them an ability that will frequently give +5 attacks, all at a +2 bonus to hit.  That isn't even considering feat synergies like 2-w rend.

If you think pouncing is weak,  then go look at some of the pounce builds over in the character OP boards at wizards.

My opinion is to not just hand-wave some pouncelike ability in for free/cheap.  At the very least it should cost more more than 1 feat,  or somewhere in the neighborhood of 75-100k gold.  Which would represent a very large portion of a 12-13th level characterd wealth.  And would still be WAY worth it.


----------



## Dandu (Nov 19, 2009)

akbearfoot said:


> I don't agree with the notion that giving melee characters Full attacks nearly 100% of the time is remotely balanced.



There are a lot of ways to interfere with charging. Concealment, difficult terrain, etc. It's hardly giving them full attacks 100% of the time.



> Granted, it is still weak compared to a no spells barred game where there is no common sense restrictions on spells from the  SpC/splatbooks *PHB*.




Fixed it for you. Even in core, a caster has many more tricks than melee, who are basically restricted to hitting things and using skills, if the aren't a Fighter. Why don't we at least let them hit things well since that's basically all they can do?



> But I would like to think most games have some measure of balance applied to them.



Balance depends on the game. Pounce fits right in with a medium high to high powered setting.



> I'll make an assumption that the character who the OP is considering the ability for has taken the 2-W fighting tree...actually I think they have to have them in order to have 2-W rend. And they are at least to the point where they are at 3 attacks a round. So thats 6 with a 2-w user. That means that you're giving them an ability that will frequently give +5 attacks, all at a +2 bonus to hit. That isn't even considering feat synergies like 2-w rend.



What's the damage on those attacks?


----------



## Herzog (Nov 20, 2009)

> What's the damage on those attacks?




That depends on the build....

I've just completed a TWF Barbarian 1(Pounce)/Ranger 4/Scout 4/Tempest 1 build that, with a 40 foot charge, has a:

AC of 23
attacks at +14/+14/+9/+9

and each attack does 5d6 damage.

assuming all his attacks hit, that's 20d6 damage in one round, each round he can make that (at least 20') charge. That's a fair amount of damage output for a 10th lvl character.

However, when I compare that to the Druid/Barbarian with his (augmented) strength of 22, full power attack, and greatclub, that (from memory) manages to do 1d10+56 damage (because of some nasty weapon augmentation from the spell compendium), what are we talking about?

Two Weapon Fighters (compared to Two Handed Weapon fighers) get shafted big time because of the way strength bonuses are handled and Power Attack works.

It _requires_ a build like this to make TWF work.

And yes, Pounce at lvl 1 without having to further invest into barbarian may look kind of cheap. But you give up the (untyped) fast movement.


----------



## Runestar (Nov 20, 2009)

> Two Weapon Fighters (compared to Two Handed Weapon fighers) get shafted big time because of the way strength bonuses are handled and Power Attack works.




You are also forgetting that depending on the foe, dr may apply up to 4 times. 5d6 averages 18 damage, dr10 easily halves your damage output if you lack the appropriate weapon. 

Conversely, chargers or ToB martial adepts typically make 1 attack per round for massive damage, so dr applies only once. When I have 1 attack dealing 50+ damage, dr10 isn't that great a deal.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Nov 20, 2009)

I think the ability to attack multiple times is worth something more than the numbers, though.  If you only attack once and miss, and the combat only lasts ~3 rounds, as IME they tend to, then that REALLY sucks as a player.


----------



## the Jester (Nov 20, 2009)

Just a side note on Dire Charge (the epic feat)- it actually only works the first round of combat.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Nov 20, 2009)

Ditto for Catfolk Pounce, which requires playing an LA +1 race that doesn't even get a str boost.

Pouncing Charge maneuver requires a level 9 Swordsage or Warblade, or level 18 and ~3 feats.

Druids and rangers have to wait till level 5+ and expend a daily resource (spell) to do it each time.  Druids can also spend a feat for the privalege *laughing* of expending a Wildshape usage each time they want to Pounce.  Lion of Talisid gets it around level 12-13 (I always enter level 9 so I have large wildshape first), and is a very specific build, requiring some exalted feats and basically designed solely for a VoP druid.

Aside from the broken (and 3.0) template, Lion totem Barbarian is the only one who gets pounce nearly that quickly and easily.  I had a houserule thread a while back trying to think of ways ot balance it, since I don't mind a barbarian getting it from the start.  I just don't like how cheaply easy it is to dip and get it.


----------



## Freakohollik (Nov 21, 2009)

StreamOfTheSky said:


> I think the ability to attack multiple times is worth something more than the numbers, though.  If you only attack once and miss, and the combat only lasts ~3 rounds, as IME they tend to, then that REALLY sucks as a player.




This is why you make sure you don't miss. True Strike, Smite Evil, Deep Impact(XPH), Shock Trooper(CW), or Sure Strike(SC, total hax) and full power/leap attack. At low levels you can probably get by with just your strength bonus. At higher levels, make sure you carry around a Luck Blade in your pocket so you can reroll anything unlucky 1/day.


----------



## Dandu (Nov 21, 2009)

I hope the OP gets this info. He hasn't shown up at all since his last post.


----------



## Mistah J (Nov 21, 2009)

I'm here!

Thanks so much for all the replies everyone. At this point, after looking at all these options I've come to an uncertain conclusion:

The ability to Pounce is a mid to high level ability to be sure, but not so powerful as to be Epic.

So I think I might make my own feat. One that grants the full pounce ability but has enough requirements to keep it out of reach for low-level characters.
This, however, is a discussion for the House Rules board.

Ultimately I think it's neat how when 3.x started, Pounce was considered so strong, a limited version was an Epic feat. When it "ended" however, it was a 1st lvl alternate class feature.

Strange eh?


----------



## Dandu (Nov 22, 2009)

You did get the part where it's also a 2nd level Ranger spell, right? Just checking.


----------



## Corsair (Nov 22, 2009)

Mistah J said:


> Ultimately I think it's neat how when 3.x started, Pounce was considered so strong, a limited version was an Epic feat. When it "ended" however, it was a 1st lvl alternate class feature.
> 
> Strange eh?




Not strange at all, since apparently the original designers had no idea about balance and playtests were of dubious help in that regard.  All in all, warriors have had to be consistently powered up throughout the 3rd edition existence to come close to matching the capabilities of spellcasters, especially at higher levels.


----------



## Herzog (Nov 23, 2009)

In all fairness, Pounce IS a very powerfull ability.

It allows you to bypass a basic restriction in the rules:
You cannot perform both a move and a full attack..

The origin of the 'problem' lies with that basic restriction. If movement and attacks had been on a more relative scale, the Pounce ability would be less powerfull.

example: if you have 4 attacks (regardless of source), you can perform 4 attacks, or three attacks and move 1/4 of your (double) move, or 2 attacks and 1/2 your (double) move, or 1 attack and 3/4 of your (double) move.

With this (house)rule in place, being able to both move and perform multiple attacks is already possible without pounce, so the impact of the pounce ability becomes less severe.

Now, I'm not saying this is a GOOD houserule. It would, however, remove some of the strange effects you get on higher levels, where fighters with multiple attacks either have to stand in place throughout the combat to benefit from their multiple attacks, or move and be reduced to the single attack they could already make at first level (but with a higher attack bonus, of course).

The RAW tend to reduce combat (using melee oriented characters) to a series of attack rolls without any combat dynamic.

That is, if you count without other options melee oriented characters have, of course. Such as Skirmish, power attack, Combat Expertise, etc.


----------



## Shin Okada (Nov 23, 2009)

Mistah J said:


> Ultimately I think it's neat how when 3.x started, Pounce was considered so strong, a limited version was an Epic feat. When it "ended" however, it was a 1st lvl alternate class feature.
> 
> Strange eh?




For those 10 years, many of my friends tried to make some nasty charge-based builds. Combining those multiply by X damage when charging, pounce, quickend true strike or wraithstrike, abilities to turn once while charging, flight, etc.

All failed. Due to the lack of versatility (or usability). Simply, they could not charge as often as they wanted (or expected) to. Also, charging is not the best movement when melee warriors are expected to hold the line.

I guess designers in WotC have experienced the same. On paper, damage output of those abilities and combos looked awesome. But on the gaming table, they did not work as expected.


----------



## Runestar (Nov 23, 2009)

> The origin of the 'problem' lies with that basic restriction. If movement and attacks had been on a more relative scale, the Pounce ability would be less powerfull.




Which was a problematic restriction to begin with.

When you consider that at higher lvs, a spellcaster can easily cast a high lv spell, follow up with a quickened spell and still move, being limited to just a single attack after moving is just too debilitating for a fighter.


----------



## Eldritch_Lord (Nov 23, 2009)

Herzog said:


> In all fairness, Pounce IS a very powerfull ability.
> 
> It allows you to bypass a basic restriction in the rules:
> You cannot perform both a move and a full attack..




A restriction that, arguably, shouldn't have existed in the first place.  In 1e and 2e, if and when you got multiple attacks, you could make them all and still move; there were no iterative attack penalties, no full attacks vs. standard attacks, or anything of the sort, just "you can move and attack."  It worked out just fine then, and there was really no reason to change that.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Nov 23, 2009)

Eldritch_Lord said:


> A restriction that, arguably, shouldn't have existed in the first place.  In 1e and 2e, if and when you got multiple attacks, you could make them all and still move; there were no iterative attack penalties, no full attacks vs. standard attacks, or anything of the sort, just "you can move and attack."  It worked out just fine then, and there was really no reason to change that.




But you also didn't get ALL of those attacks on your turn all at once.  They had time delays, didn't they?  So you'd get your full attack eventually if enemies were in reach, but over the course of the round.  Surely you don't think the "nova" effect of making all of them at once is identical to that, right?


----------



## Freakohollik (Nov 23, 2009)

Shin Okada said:


> For those 10 years, many of my friends tried to make some nasty charge-based builds. Combining those multiply by X damage when charging, pounce, quickend true strike or wraithstrike, abilities to turn once while charging, flight, etc.
> 
> All failed. Due to the lack of versatility (or usability). Simply, they could not charge as often as they wanted (or expected) to. Also, charging is not the best movement when melee warriors are expected to hold the line.




All failed? I did this all the time and it was great. We must be playing very differently.


----------



## Jhaelen (Nov 23, 2009)

Freakohollik said:


> All failed? I did this all the time and it was great. We must be playing very differently.



Yep, apparently. I agree with Shin Okada. 

It's extremely rare that anyone is ever able to charge an enemy in my games. Terrain features almost always prevent it. And if terrain doesn't prevent it, placement of allies or other enemies prevents it. 

Unless you're flying or are insubstantial, charging is simply not a reliable option.


----------



## Herzog (Nov 24, 2009)

> charging is not the best movement when melee warriors are expected to hold the line.



To borrow from 4ed: Chargers are Strikers. melee warriors that 'hold the line' are Defenders. You can't do both (well) at the same time.



> We must be playing very differently.



Indeed. Charging oppertunities depend very much on the game.

I happen to be playing in a campaign that uses a lot of outdoor combat. That introduces a lot of charging oppertunities, if not for the fact the DM also uses a lot of terrain that tends to reduce movement.

There are class abilities etc. to overcome the movement restrictions imposed by difficult terrain (scout has that at lvl 6 I believe) and that SHOULD also allow you to charge, but I'm not entirely sure about that.

That still leaves the requirement for a straight line, unless you invest two feats to gain Acrobatic Charge and may make a single, up to 90 degrees, angle in your charge.

Another solution would be to allow charge as a standard action, to make it possible to prepare your route, but I haven't found anything that would allow that.

Last option: some kind of short range teleportation by a friendly spellcaster placing you in a beneficial position just before your turn...

Point remains: when you DM wants to prevent you from charging, he has all the tools he needs at his disposal. If your DM doesn't want you to charge, you (probably) can't. If this is frustrating you in your game because you made a charger: talk to your DM....


----------



## Runestar (Nov 24, 2009)

> Another solution would be to allow charge as a standard action, to make it possible to prepare your route, but I haven't found anything that would allow that.




Boots of the battlecharger (MIC), 3/day.


----------



## Shin Okada (Nov 24, 2009)

Herzog said:


> To borrow from 4ed: Chargers are Strikers. melee warriors that 'hold the line' are Defenders. You can't do both (well) at the same time.




That is true from some point of view. But not true from other point of view.

In 3.5e, a melee warrior can be both striker and defender, by having high AC, bigger amount of HPs (and other kind of durabiliteis) & also having high-damage output via making full-attack or other method.

A charger could possibly be a striker (and not defender) in 3.5e. But you don't need to be a charger to be a striker.

Also, as a side note. Charging is far much easier in 4e. Both strikers and defenders charge more often than 3e melee warriors do.


----------



## Herzog (Nov 24, 2009)

@Runestar: nice! too bad my 'charger' is in a low/no magic campaign.
sidenote: the MIC lists is as 2/day

@Shin Okada:
I'm not sure we're in disagreement or not. I said you can't do both (well) at the same time.

Yes, you can build a character that both act as defender and have decent melee output. It will, however, not have as high a defensive capability as a focused defender build, nor have the damage output of a focused striker. That's the power of 3.5 when compared to other editions: versatility in your build, by allowing mixing and matching of classes and abilities.


----------



## Eldritch_Lord (Nov 24, 2009)

StreamOfTheSky said:


> But you also didn't get ALL of those attacks on your turn all at once.  They had time delays, didn't they?  So you'd get your full attack eventually if enemies were in reach, but over the course of the round.  Surely you don't think the "nova" effect of making all of them at once is identical to that, right?




The time delay is based on your weapon, but you do in fact get all your attacks at once; everyone rolls initiative, modifies it based on weapon or spell being cast, and goes in order.  Nova capability was less of a concern, since with much lower hit points across the board a single attack could often take you down if it hit, much less two or three.


----------



## Herzog (Nov 24, 2009)

> The time delay is based on your weapon, but you do in fact get all your attacks at once; everyone rolls initiative, modifies it based on weapon or spell being cast, and goes in order. Nova capability was less of a concern, since with much lower hit points across the board a single attack could often take you down if it hit, much less two or three.




Now, my AD&D 2nd edition may be a bit rusty, but I do still play it one or two times a year, and last time I checked, multiple attacks went in order...

That is, your initiative is modified by your weapon speed, but if you have multiple attacks (and so does your opponent), you first alternate primary attacks, then secondary, and so on, each time in (modified) initiative order.

Now, that may be an optional rule my DM uses, but as far as I know it's an official rule and not a houserule...


----------



## Eldritch_Lord (Nov 24, 2009)

Herzog said:


> Now, my AD&D 2nd edition may be a bit rusty, but I do still play it one or two times a year, and last time I checked, multiple attacks went in order...
> 
> That is, your initiative is modified by your weapon speed, but if you have multiple attacks (and so does your opponent), you first alternate primary attacks, then secondary, and so on, each time in (modified) initiative order.
> 
> Now, that may be an optional rule my DM uses, but as far as I know it's an official rule and not a houserule...




You're right; my mistake.  I was looking at the section on monster attacks and not the section on weapon attacks.


----------



## Runestar (Nov 25, 2009)

How is a fighter a defender in 3e? He has nothing that would entice the foe to want to attack him over other PCs. Typically, the enemy would be better off taking an AoO to attack the other more fragile PCs. At best, he is a striker/controller (using a spiked chain to trip-lock foes).


----------



## Shin Okada (Nov 25, 2009)

Runestar said:


> How is a fighter a defender in 3e?




Bye engaging in melee with melee opponents (threaten). And by physically blocking the path.


----------



## Freakohollik (Nov 25, 2009)

Runestar said:


> How is a fighter a defender in 3e? He has nothing that would entice the foe to want to attack him over other PCs. Typically, the enemy would be better off taking an AoO to attack the other more fragile PCs. At best, he is a striker/controller (using a spiked chain to trip-lock foes).




Easy. Power game your damage and one-shot enemies. Nothing more defensive than that.

If you haven't done that, then have the fighter stand in the doorway and have the wizard behind him.


----------



## Runestar (Nov 25, 2009)

> Bye engaging in melee with melee opponents (threaten). And by physically blocking the path.




And this prevents foes from simply skirting around the fighter how?


----------



## Shin Okada (Nov 25, 2009)

Runestar said:


> And this prevents foes from simply skirting around the fighter how?




By inflicting damage via AoO which the opponent did not take if it did not move away from the warrior.

By physically stand still in a choking point (say, in front of a 5-foot wide door). Or by simply providing cover to other PCs (in case the opponents are using ranged attacks), or blocking the charging line to his comrades.

Well, basically, it is true that 4e defenders are more tune-upped as defenders. But they too can't always provide some defense to other PCs. There are situations when some opponents can simply ignore defenders.


----------

