L13E5: Mammoth Riders 

I disagree that the "tank" needs more AC, they should have less AC than the people they are trying to protect. If they have more, the enemies would consider them too hard to hit and go after the people that they are trying to protect. There are very few "tank" mechanics in 5e, but one of the easiest to get is Low AC: most DMs will see that as more likely to hit and go after them. Unless you have one of the others, higher AC will make you less effective at protecting your allies. The Fighter has Defensive Fighting Style, and stuck to the original build from the starter set with the greataxe (I recall that Drak played the Fighter at Level 3 and experimented with a shield). I think the strategy of the Champion Fighter is run in and taunt the enemies into swarming them, getting them into Fireball formation (or Spirit Guardians formation) and providing Sneak for the Rogue. They also have some mobility control with high Athletics. The Cleric should be the most survivable, as they have the power to bring the others back. Barbarians are great at tanking because they can taunt enemies in with the high chance of hitting and then survive a lot of those hits.

@d20tactics Tank to me means tank - heavily defensive. I know MMORPGs changed that definition to have to also include aggroing, but that's new. We've been talking about tanks since the box set and they were typically considered defensive fighters with very average damage. They were a tank because they were highly defensive and wouldn't die in two rounds. Still today, one of the best tactics is to find a bottleneck/chokepoint and put your full plate fighter with a shield in the doorway and take the dodge action. Our party in Ravenloft wiped out a cave full of werewolves by having my Armored Sorcerer with Blur on holding up the cave entrance and the party just gunning everything down. They tried to retreat and we followed in but they were already devistated.and easy for the pickings. If you really get out ahead of the party while the "gunners" retreat to the back, I find very few DMs that will just ignore your character sitting out there all alone. They will swarm you and then attack with flanking and try to score crits. If you get enough rolls in one turn, you're almost guaranteed a hit. If you get jumped in a cubicle, I get it, the DM will chomp on the softies. But if your party is even 10% tactical, a natural frontline will emerge as casters, rogues, and archers fall back. They may only buy them a round or two without being harrassed, and enemies will of course skirt the frontline and go for the squishing, but that still doesn't mean I'm not tying up a lot of attacks meant tofr the squishing because it's kind of hard to just ignore the Monk that can move 130ft with just her normal movement while hasted and bring the fight to the enemy before they can even get halfway across the map. I can't imagine a world where higher AC, saves, and damage reduction isn't a bonus to a frontline melee character. I get your point about monsters being hesitant to swing on you, but I find in most battles I leave enemies with very little choice but to try and "come at me, bro".

@d20tactics My Armored Clockwork Sorcerer at 6th level "tanked" a flipping Deva for 3 rounds using 19 AC, Protection from E/G and the Shield Spell. He finally hit me and did a crap load of damage that took me down to 12 hps. But even the DM said my Clocklock saved the party from a major beat down. How did I aggro this Deva, you ask? I pissed it off by telling it I was a Devil Worshipper of Fierna, which is true, and I relished in slaughtering a Celestial. That totally got his attention and he locked onto me like flies on sh!t. 😆 🤣 Because, Creatures do not always have to take the most optimized attacks, especially if something thats very opposable provides a distraction. Even my goody two shoes Monk will regularly "talk.mad sh$t" to the enemies to get them to fight her. It's in her character and it works often enough at different tables. I made my case. I digress. I understand your point and it's not unreasonable even if nonagreeable.

@@007ohboy Tanks in the sense of Main Battle Tanks, aka Armored Units, emphasize firepower, maneuverability, and survivability. In that sense, the Fighter qualifies. Tanks from MMOs and from 4th edition DnD include the ability to draw attention of the enemy away from friendlies. If the only requirement for a tank is survivability, then a lot of things start to qualify that don't make any sense: 5th level wizard with Fly can survive forever if it doesn't get hit. Unarmored Cleric constantly healing himself is a tank because he survives. Rogue that can hide better than the enemy can find him is a tank. If everything is a tank, nothing is tank. But if that's what you mean, then yes, strictly having a high AC counts. Yes, bottle necking the enemy is a good tanking tactic because it forces the foe to target someone they would rather not - which I argue is the point of the tank. It's easy to ignore targets that don't have any way of compelling you to attack them: just don't attack. If the most they can do is Oppy you when you walk away, maybe take it. If they Dodged on their turn, all the better, you're taking their Action and Reaction for one attack and no penalty. You are correct saying that having high AC, Saves, and Resistances are a bonus, but they are a bonus to everyone. A character isn't a frontliner because they have high AC, they are a frontliner because they have reliable grapple, sentinel movement locking, stun locking monk attacks, compelled duel, or really harsh opportunity attacks. If you do this at range, you are still a tank, we just call them controllers. It does the same thing.

@@007ohboy Yeah, it's a great feeling when a character is able to manipulate the enemies using role-playing reasons. If it's through funny/thoughtful/dramatic dialogue, based on information gained by investigation and deduction, risky bluffs, or some other methods, it's usually entertaining for the whole party. The DM also tells the story through their choices, and I think you would agree that the Celestial acted against tactical conventions, but that's the story that the DM wants to tell: this NPC places value in the destruction of a specific enemy over the best tactical choice. I'm glad you brought this up because that's the goal of this channel from the DM's side: how to use the monsters tactically to tell the story you want to tell. I don't want people to think they have to run monsters this way, I want them to know how they can accomplish what they want to accomplish.