Baldur's Gate : The Sword Coast Chronicles : NWN2 Persistent World

Tanks have low dps and are generally boorish to play in small parties for the most part.

Yet the server population here seems to be hell bent on nerfing tanky builds though at the end of the day everyone wants a tank build in their party to take point and absorb damage in their party.

Tanks are not unsatisfying to play solo. A very select few actually desire to play a tank character. From what I've seen here, less then 5%.

Why are most folk for nerfing tank / heavy armor builds and hence discouraging the minority who would otherwise enjoy playing damage absorbers?

Shouldn't we as a player population be encouraging a select few that actually enjoy playing point/tanks instead of trying to nerf them out of envy that they can endure for long periods of time while boorishly chipping away at enemies health?

Why such tanky envy?

I think a lot of it is that 'Tank' is not really a DnD role. Having a high defense has little to do with lacking a high offence generally speaking.

Seems to me everyone wants to nurf melee in general.. whom already suffer.

SBlack wrote:
Why such tanky hate?

Tanks simply lost a lot of appeal with the advent of both ground attack aircraft and the prevalence of accurate and effective infantry fired anti-armor weapons. When two dudes with a SMAW firing a few thousands dollars of rocket can f*** up your multi-million dollar tank, what's the point?

I hope that was a fairly comprehensive answer.

More to the point though, could you be more specific? This reads as a general complaint more so than a directed question. How do you think tanky builds are being "nerfed?" Mind you, I agree that pure melees tend to be more difficult to succeed with, but that isn't really news. In fact, I would hazard to say it isn't really news to many players. So are you trying to crowd source ideas to fix it, and if so, what in particular do you want to address?

Asmodea wrote:I think a lot of it is that 'Tank' is not really a DnD role. Having a high defense has little to do with lacking a high offence generally speaking.

Hardly! , in classic GG DnD clerics, rogues, and mages hide behind fighter builds who are expected to take point!

SBlack wrote:

Asmodea wrote:I think a lot of it is that 'Tank' is not really a DnD role. Having a high defense has little to do with lacking a high offence generally speaking.

Hardly! , in classic GG DnD clerics, rogues, and mages hide behind fighter builds who are expected to take point!

Yes, but in D&D a frontline warrior is not always a fighter and is not always a "tank" per se.

Boddynock wrote:

SBlack wrote:

Asmodea wrote:I think a lot of it is that 'Tank' is not really a DnD role. Having a high defense has little to do with lacking a high offence generally speaking.

Hardly! , in classic GG DnD clerics, rogues, and mages hide behind fighter builds who are expected to take point!

Yes, but in D&D a frontline warrior is not always a fighter and is not always a "tank" per se.

Semantics

I agree tanks are not that fun to play. I use to love my 700hp fighter build until I realized that any genaric hipster or caster could solo any creature I could tank while I lacked their DPS. Generally speaking people gravitate towards high DPS builds with defense being brought up to be adequate. The tank gets less xp, solos worse, and is less desired in parties.

Remember folks the Ultimate DD is the exception not the rule.

What I mean is that well built fighters in general in 3rd edition DnD output good reliable damage. DnD is not built on the Triad of: Tank, Healer, DPS. It just isn't. It is built more on expending resources and attrition and the right tool for the right job. Building a character to purely be able to stand there and ignore or mitigate attacks while another kills it is not really what 3rd edition is good at.

Tanky style pc's would be much better if they actually attracted agro. However, the AI cheats more than Tiger Woods on a bender, so it'll always agro the biggest threat which is usually a bard with inspirations up or a PC with power attack active. I've tested on my fighter, he attracts lots of attention with IPA active and barely any with ICE active.

Also, tanks are boring. Big numbers in offence is where it's at!

So basically tanks turn out to be the best RP characters out there. Don't kill, don't tank, use skills.

And didn't we have a base class for tanks on this server?
That had a feat that made enemies attack the tank?
Is anyone using this class and feats?

dzidek1983 wrote:So basically tanks turn out to be the best RP characters out there. Don't kill, don't tank, use skills.

And didn't we have a base class for tanks on this server?
That had a feat that made enemies attack the tank?
Is anyone using this class and feats?

I have in the past but the problem was if you get a PRC or don't min max your cha your aggro ability plummets.

Boddynock wrote:

SBlack wrote:
Why such tanky hate?

Tanks simply lost a lot of appeal with the advent of both ground attack aircraft and the prevalence of accurate and effective infantry fired anti-armor weapons. When two dudes with a SMAW firing a few thousands dollars of rocket can f*** up your multi-million dollar tank, what's the point?

I hope that was a fairly comprehensive answer.

speaking as a former 19K. tanks are not what you think they are. tanks are more mobile than mobile infantry. they are the absolute bane to mobile infantry that can be destroyed at great range and speed. where a mobile infantry vehicle would be useless against such a foe. even at 20-1 odds because the 25mm would be like a bug bite whereas the 120mm main of the tank would take the mobile infantry vehicle out with a single blow from 1000's of meters away. tanks are only limited in smaller urban areas where they cause more destruction than desired by command. not because they are ineffective. modern tanks can be fitted with many different packages to make them optimized for a multitude of applications. also there is ZERO shoulder fired munitions that could destroy an american M1A2. we are not using T72's here. even a tow would be useless against 12inches of depleted uranium. also abrams are fitted with a coaxial m240 that would make very quick and messy work of those poor two firing a smaw toward the still fully functional tank.

i hope that was a very comprehensive answer

I find my self aroused by Aaron's tank knowledge... is this odd? lmao

WhatsInTheBox wrote:I find my self aroused by Aaron's tank knowledge... is this odd? lmao

To me?? YES!!

Tank you for making this thread.