PDA

View Full Version : The Optimized Party?



Kaihaku
2009-02-27, 08:48 PM
So, a discussion on group optimization. I'm curious, what would an optimized party look like? Would it simply be Batman Wizards and maybe a GODzilla or two? Or would there be more synergy than that? I'm certain that it is possible for a group to be greater than the sum of its parts, in optimization theory how?

Assume a party of four characters with an optional fifth member. Minmaxing (optimized) is a given but avoid Munchkinism (broken ala Planar Shepherd). It would be interesting to include "combos" and various other tactics the group might use.

monty
2009-02-27, 08:49 PM
Wizard
Wizard
Wizard
Druid

Druid handles all the direct fighting (if it's ever necessary), wizards handle everything else and buff the druid (if necessary).

Depending on the setting, you might swap out one of the wizards for an artificer for item crafting.

Kaihaku
2009-02-27, 08:53 PM
Specialized wizards or generalists? Do each of them use the same tactics/spells (straight out of Batman) or do they divide into roles?

mikej
2009-02-27, 09:01 PM
Wizard
Druid
Cleric
Artificer

Wizard of either Conjuration Specialist or Generalist but highly focused on both buffs/debuffs. If Incantatrix is allowed then that would be my best bet.

Druid & Cleric can handle themselves in melee and benefit from the Wizards buffs/debuffs. Straight up Cleric/Druid 20 or some decent PrC that doesn't lose caster level.

Artificer for the trapfinding and excellent item crafting etc etc

ericgrau
2009-02-27, 09:05 PM
fighter, bard, monk, sorcerer :P

But seriously this thread is gonna turn into a bunch of quick opinions unless you ask for something more specific. Not really much behind the optimization. When you ask for something more specific then it'll turn into specific opinions, but at least that's a start.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-02-27, 09:05 PM
Wizard
Wizard
Wizard
Druid

Druid handles all the direct fighting (if it's ever necessary), wizards handle everything else and buff the druid (if necessary).

Depending on the setting, you might swap out one of the wizards for an artificer for item crafting.

And will get hosed by a marathon game.

Look at what you are suggesting. Every single caster is going to have to blow spells EVERY FIGHT to win. There will never be a situation of "Oh, it's just mooks, let the meat shields take care of it", because, other than the Druid, there ARE no meat shields.

In any campaign with time crunch and waves of mooks ,this party will get eaten. For example, Saph's game that just got posted, what, a week or less ago? The one with all the dragons in it.

If you are going to insist on doing this, make one a Warlock, one a Beguiler, one a Batman Conjurer, and the Dr00d.

Dr00d picks up Spontaneous healing feat, mostly stays in wildshape. Warlock blasts to cause 'free' mass death. Hellfire Glaivelock should be more than capable of it.

Conjurer ditches Enchantment and Evocation. Enchantment because the Beguiler has it covered, and Evocation because... well... it sucks. He doesn't ban Illusion because he needs Greater Shadow Evocation for Contingency, Forcecage, and a couple other spells.

dspeyer
2009-02-27, 09:08 PM
What level?

At level 20, magic dominates so much that you probably want four mages. At lower levels, you need more diversity.

Jallorn
2009-02-27, 09:10 PM
Ranger
Sorcerer/Wizard
Fighter
Bard

Ranger and Fighter handle melee, Bard and Wizard/Sorcerer handle spells, and Ranger and Bard handle scouting. Rather subject to variable of the players of course, but assuming that the player knows how to play their build, it shouldn't be a problem what spells or feats are picked. The Bard can also add some ranged or, if he's strong, melee combat, and both the Fighter and the Ranger can go ranged, though it's less helpful. Just changes their strategy.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2009-02-27, 09:19 PM
Shneekey: Since that third wizard is going to be preparing redundant spells anyway, I agree that you might as well make him a beguiler for some trapfinding/skillmonkeyness, additional spells per day and knowledge of spells the other two wizards won't want to memorize. Oh, and the Beguiler can UMD a wand of lesser vigor, which becomes quite important in those kinds of games.

I really don't think warlock is a good idea, though. He personally might be better for a marathon style game, but having more prep casters means the other casters don't have to use as much of their higher-power resources every combat, improving the daily durability of the party as a whole.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-02-27, 09:54 PM
Shneekey: Since that third wizard is going to be preparing redundant spells anyway, I agree that you might as well make him a beguiler for some trapfinding/skillmonkeyness, additional spells per day and knowledge of spells the other two wizards won't want to memorize. Oh, and the Beguiler can UMD a wand of lesser vigor, which becomes quite important in those kinds of games.

I really don't think warlock is a good idea, though. He personally might be better for a marathon style game, but having more prep casters means the other casters don't have to use as much of their higher-power resources every combat, improving the daily durability of the party as a whole.

Sometimes the GM gets tired of Batman Wizard-esque shennanigans, and just flat says "No, it's immune to all Save or Screwed, Save or Die... hell, they automatically make ALL saves. NOW what are ya gonna do?" To which the Hellfire Warlock retorts "Over a thousand damage per round... same as always."

Do not underestimate the power of a Hellfire Warlock. Heck, you can't even make critters immune to them, because they specifically bypass normal fire immunity. You can't send SR beasts against them for the same reason. With a Wand of True Strike, you can't even keep them from HITTING you.

ericgrau
2009-02-27, 10:01 PM
Well the DM doesn't need to just declare it so. There are monsters like dragons that have a lot of immunities and SR. Their saves aren't too bad either. And I thought the batman wizard's strongest tactic was to haste the martial guy and trap half the enemies so that the martial guy can mop up the other half before the first half recover. Maybe GBSD means disable half the baddies with an AoE save-or-suck or barrier and start using true save-or-dies (not save-or-sucks) against the other half? Well, unless it's a dragon or some such.

Frosty
2009-02-27, 10:06 PM
Is it a testament of the Beguiler's power that it gets some mentions in a thread about an OPTIMIZED party?

monty
2009-02-27, 10:09 PM
Sometimes the GM gets tired of Batman Wizard-esque shennanigans, and just flat says "No, it's immune to all Save or Screwed, Save or Die... hell, they automatically make ALL saves. NOW what are ya gonna do?" To which the Hellfire Warlock retorts "Over a thousand damage per round... same as always."

Do not underestimate the power of a Hellfire Warlock. Heck, you can't even make critters immune to them, because they specifically bypass normal fire immunity. You can't send SR beasts against them for the same reason. With a Wand of True Strike, you can't even keep them from HITTING you.

If you're going to do that, why not make all monsters have AC >9000. I don't see why you should boost all their defenses except for one. Besides, casters still have Enervation and other no-save spells that work against touch AC, not to mention battlefield control and buffing.

Jack_Simth
2009-02-27, 10:28 PM
So, a discussion on group optimization. I'm curious, what would an optimized party look like? Would it simply be Batman Wizards and maybe a GODzilla or two? Or would there be more synergy than that? I'm certain that it is possible for a group to be greater than the sum of its parts, in optimization theory how?

Assume a party of four characters with an optional fifth member. Minmaxing (optimized) is a given but avoid Munchkinism (broken ala Planar Shepherd). It would be interesting to include "combos" and various other tactics the group might use.
Optimized for what?

For fun (fundamentally, it's a game, so this is the point...), optimized means whatever will permit everyone to have the most fun. Mechanically? Munchkinism is a fuzzy concept, and different people have different levels of lactose intolerance. Four DMM(Persistent Spell) Clerics combining group buffs and personal buffs can be murder... especially if they are also Cheaters of Mystria who run around in antimagic fields all day (mind you, that doesn't work, as the Clerics lose access to the Supernatural Turn Undead class feature inside the AMF...).

A Wizard, a Beguiler, a Cleric, and a Druid will also murderize most CR-appropriate opponents at most levels ... assuming they take a few reserve feats (each picks at least one of Fiery Burst, Storm Bolt, Acidic Splatter, Invisible Needle, Winter's Blast, or Summon Elemental (addendum: No overlap on these; everyone uses a different element); everyone gets Heighten Spell, and the Beguiler also needs Arcane Preparation) for the endurance runs. At least one Vampiric Weapon (magic item compendium) is also useful for the endurance runs (uncapped non-combat healing if you also have Summon Elemental). Low HP-types also pick up Minor Shapeshift (at-will swift-action temp HP = Character level), although most will want it. In an AMF, the Druid and Cleric still have reasonable hit dice, reasonable armor access, and reasonable BAB (if they've thought ahead, anyway); in an AMF, the Beguiler is still a competent skill-monkey. In an AMF, the Wizard... makes sure to bring a masterwork light crossbow ... and maybe a Construct or two.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-02-27, 10:30 PM
Beguiler, Wizard, Cleric, Druid. Maybe swap the Cleric for an Artificer or Archivist. Really, at this level of play it's a combo of Rocket Launcher Tag and Rock-Paper-Scissors. It comes down to # of different offenses, knowledge of defenses, and speed at hitting those defenses.

AgentPaper
2009-02-27, 10:39 PM
Is this for 3.5 only? If so, then I'll agree with Wizard/Druid/Cleric/Artificer.

For 4E, it's a bit more interesting, but I would go with Paladin/Rogue/Warlord/Wizard. Paladin is a Half-Elf, focusing on AC and charisma based attacks. Rogue is a Halfling, with Artful Dodger, and focusing on charisma and dex. Warlord is a Dragonborn, focusing on int and buffing, and giving others more attacks. (especially the rogue, to ensure a SA every round) Wizard is a dwarven staff type, gets in close and attacks with short-range AoE and control type spells. If party needs range, Paladin and Warlord are less useful, but can still use a bow/crossbow. Rogue has a hand crossbow, and wizard has magic missile. The group does it's best at close range, however. Perfect for dungeon-crawling.

Kalirren
2009-02-27, 10:53 PM
Beguiler, Cleric, Druid, Ranger, with Artificer as the 5th wheel. I honestly think that between Beguiler, Cleric, and Druid, you really don't need a Wizard. Artificer can feed the Ranger enchanted arrows with single-shot spells on them to achieve battlefield control and/or sheer damage output in nova situations. Cleric, Druid, and Ranger have the endurance for marathons.

The one thing that might be lacking is permanent minions. If the cleric is evil, all is good with undead. If the cleric is good, then the Beguiler has work to do.

Flickerdart
2009-02-27, 11:07 PM
Why do you need the Ranger? Beguiler, Cleric, Druid, Psion. Cleric is an excellent beatstick, Druid is two+ beatsticks, Beguiler provides the tricks the others lack and Psion is there to be a more versatile spontaneous caster. Replace the psion with Psychic Warrior if you need more beatstickery, or with the Artificer if item cheese is your thing.

Outside the big 5, Factotum, Psion, Crusader and Warlock will perform excellently.

Yukitsu
2009-02-27, 11:11 PM
Incantrix, initiate of mystra, initiate of the seven fold veil and a planar shepherd.

All with leadership, and artificer cohorts.

dspeyer
2009-02-27, 11:12 PM
How about these:
Wizard / War Weaver
Bard / Sublime Chord / Virtuoso
Druid 17 / Master of Many Forms 3 (reorder to taste)
Cleric 4 / Crusader 1 / Ruby Knight Vindicator 10 / Church Inquisitor 5

All of them have 9th level spells by level 20.

For melee, there's the cleric throughout, the bard early, and the druid late (plus the animal companion and any summoned creatures). For social interaction, there's the bard. For stealth, there's the druid (he'll need a high int to cover everything, but that's a druid's third most important stat).

More importantly, bardic music, white raven maneuvers and war-woven buffs all stack to make a powerful mutual buffing society. Since the first two apply to "all allies within range", they can be used to make a cloud of low-level summoned creatures effective.

sonofzeal
2009-02-27, 11:16 PM
Well, let's see. Wizard's a necessity, of course - you'll need one good source of arcane might, and Wizards get the most versatility. I'd go with a Focussed Specialist here, to maximize number of 9th level spell slots. Let's go with Transmutation, for Shapechange and Timestop, but keep Conjuration open for Gate and Abjuration open for Disjunction; rest is optional. Take the PrC of your choice as soon as possible - Mindbender 1 is good, Incantrix is always win (even for Focussed Specialist), Master Specialist might be worth it. Use your imagination!

Artificer is necessary. By providing crafting for everyone, and making liberal use of cost-reduction feats, he can almost triple the effective buying power all the other members have. That's huge, and will make all the other characters godlike (while being no slouch himself). I'd use the Artificer as the team "skill-monkey", using Disable Trap instead of the Rogue's Trapfinding, and buffing himself to kingdom come with Wands of Weildskill and Skill Enhancement infusions. A Factotum dip might be amusing here, but really is just icing on the cake. I tend to shy away from Blastificers, because while their damage output is enormous, they blow disproportionate amount of gold to do that. Some argue that the DM is "responsible" for reinbursing you for that to keep you by WBL guidelines, but most I've known wouldn't - if you blow gold doing something cool, you're down gold and up something cool, the universe doesn't magically replace your blown gold. Still, some blasting is entirely appropriate. Season to taste.

CoDzilla. I'd go with Druid here; the Artificer will be handling buffs (and can Persist via Metamagic Item Infusion better than a Cleric can), and an extra AC meatshield is always nice. Druids will bring Holly Berry Bombs, Wildshape/Shapechange, summons, and a wide variety of utility effects to the table. Always a solid choice, but I'd go with a Summoner motif here. Even if they die fast, most enemies still have to burn actions disposing of them and they can still play a significant roll in BC and do some nice damage. And you can still Wildshape/Shapechange whenever you want to.

Martial Adept. I like Swordsages here, but most people go with Warblades or Crusaders, and all three are pretty even in terms of power. For this party, I'd go with a Tiger Claw / Shadow Hand Swordsage, for sheer mobility as well as damage output, but you really can't go too wrong with ToB in this slot.

So.....

Focussed Specialist Transmuter Wizard
Skillmonkey Artificer
Summoner Druid
Tiger Claw / Shadow Hand Swordsage

Overall strengths - four wildly different but seriously potent characters. Each will be tackling different kinds of problems, but most can assist eachother no matter the situation. All four start out effective (except maybe Artificer) and all four kinda break the game at the end (except maybe Swordsage). And even without trying to break the game, each is a force to be reckoned with alone, and the total effect should be terrifying.

Overall weaknesses - nobody has better than d8 HD, which could be an issue in an ambush situation, but all four have good methods to help prevent getting ambushed. None of the four will have particularly high Charisma/Diplomacy and there's no real logical "face" to this part, though the Artificer could fill in when needed.

Draz74
2009-02-27, 11:29 PM
I gave myself a modified version of this challenge, with Vancian casting and multiclassing (and some personally distasteful "cheese") banned. These restrictions made things much more interesting. :smallsmile:

I came up with Warblade, Dragonfire Adept, Ardent, and Factotum.

Otherwise, I second Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Beguiler, with Artificer as a highly desirable 5th Wheel. Though replacing either the Cleric or the Druid with a Crusader wouldn't hurt things too badly.

Considering the Archivist's power, I'm surprised it's not getting mentioned more. I guess it really just doesn't fill any other role than the Wizard's, and the Wizard is just master of his own role.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-02-27, 11:34 PM
I have to say, I agree with Frosty that it's interesting that the Beguiler, despite not being one of the Big 5, is being mentioned as a definite part of the party more than either the Artificer or the Archivist.

Jack_Simth
2009-02-27, 11:50 PM
I have to say, I agree with Frosty that it's interesting that the Beguiler, despite not being one of the Big 5, is being mentioned as a definite part of the party more than either the Artificer or the Archivist.
Well, the Beguiler is:

1) A full Caster.
2) A good Skill Monkey (6+Int skill points per level with a high Int (primary casting stat), they've got trapfinding, and a very nice skill list).
3) Reasonably defensible (due to the ability to wear light armor without suffering ASF).

While the Beguiler Spell List isn't up to par with the Wizard's... it's big, and it's all spontaneous. It also contains a lot of save-or-lose spells (almost entirely mind-affecting Will, but oh well), lots of defensive spells, and a reasonable set of buffs (Mage Armor, Invisibility, Haste, Greater Invisibility), some manueverability options (Spider Climb, Swift Etherealness, Shadow Walk), and even a bit of combat control (Solid Fog). All they're really missing is decent Divinations, Direct-Damage, and Save-or-Lose spells that aren't Will.

Basically, the Beguiler replaces the sneakiness of the Rogue while still being a very good caster. If you run into a situation where Magic is going to end up being more of a liability than use (traps that use Arcane Sight to determine if someone is a spellcaster, perhaps?) then the skill-monkey aspect comes into play. Basically, the Beguiler makes the list primarily as a Full Caster, and secondarily as a Skill Monkey.

Flickerdart
2009-02-27, 11:52 PM
I have to say, I agree with Frosty that it's interesting that the Beguiler, despite not being one of the Big 5, is being mentioned as a definite part of the party more than either the Artificer or the Archivist.
Because Archivist and Artificer are boring and over-used, and don't lend themselves to a wide array of play.

Plus, someone's gotta be the skillmonkey.

sonofzeal
2009-02-27, 11:55 PM
Well, the Beguiler is:

1) A full Caster.
2) A good Skill Monkey (6+Int skill points per level with a high Int (primary casting stat), they've got trapfinding, and a very nice skill list).
3) Reasonably defensible (due to the ability to wear light armor without suffering ASF).

While the Beguiler Spell List isn't up to par with the Wizard's... it's big, and it's all spontaneous. It also contains a lot of save-or-lose spells (almost entirely mind-affecting Will, but oh well), lots of defensive spells, and a reasonable set of buffs (Mage Armor, Invisibility, Haste, Greater Invisibility), some manueverability options (Spider Climb, Swift Etherealness, Shadow Walk), and even a bit of combat control (Solid Fog). All they're really missing is decent Divinations, Direct-Damage, and Save-or-Lose spells that aren't Will.

Basically, the Beguiler replaces the sneakiness of the Rogue while still being a very good caster. If you run into a situation where Magic is going to end up being more of a liability than use (traps that use Arcane Sight to determine if someone is a spellcaster, perhaps?) then the skill-monkey aspect comes into play. Basically, the Beguiler makes the list primarily as a Full Caster, and secondarily as a Skill Monkey.
Agreed. The "optimized party" needs a rogue-replacement, and that means a skillmonkey who can find traps. The list for that is pretty short, and Beguiler is fairly obvious as one of the most rogue-like and one of the most powerful. I went with Artificer because he makes everyone else awesome (and having awesome teammates is a wildly underrated class feature), and can function just fine as a trapfinder and skillmonkey. If Artificers couldn't find magical traps, or if they lacked Skill Enhancement Item infusions, I'd have no problem putting a Beguiler on the team. As it is, I like my choice.

(edit)

Because Archivist and Artificer are boring and over-used, and don't lend themselves to a wide array of play.

Plus, someone's gotta be the skillmonkey.
Disagreed. Artificers are bloody awesome skillmonkeys, and have a giant array of options to make them interesting. If you're sick of Blastificers, play with a focus on Effigies/Constructs, or debuffing, or buffing, or diplomancing (scrolls of Glibness ahoy), or skillmonkeying, or make yourself a Clockwork Armor and fight on the front lines, or mastermind from behind the scenes. You can't do all of those effectively at the same time (since each requires substantial gold investment), but you can pick and choose what suits you best. I'd say Artificers are even more flexible for playstyle than Factotums are, although maybe a little less adaptable.

Lupy
2009-02-27, 11:59 PM
Let's see... Dungeon Master, Player, Player, Player, Player, Player sounds pretty good.

Or maybe: Defensive Fighter, Brutal Rouge, Two Weapon Ranger, Infernal Warlock, and War Wizard.

The Synergy of your casters and the sheer number of monsters you could kill ought to make up for the lack of a leader.

dspeyer
2009-02-28, 12:01 AM
Seeing lots of beguiler isn't all that strange. Leaving a character without 9th level spells seems wrong in an optimization exercise, but a *party* needs a capable skillmonkey. There aren't a lot of good options for full caster/skill-monkeys, and beguiler is probably the strongest of them.

Frosty
2009-02-28, 12:09 AM
I have to say, I agree with Frosty that it's interesting that the Beguiler, despite not being one of the Big 5, is being mentioned as a definite part of the party more than either the Artificer or the Archivist.

What about the top 10? Would you place it in the top 10 list?

dspeyer
2009-02-28, 12:34 AM
It seems to me we're seeing a lot of parties with very optimized individuals and diversity of talents, but not a whole lot of inter-character synergy. There's got to be some good combinations out there....

The first thing off my head is a wizard/malconvoker/incantrix and a bard/warblade (song of the white raven). What's scarier than summoning 1d3+1 fiendish megaraptors twice a round? All those megaraptors joining in a war master's charge.

Jack_Simth
2009-02-28, 12:38 AM
Agreed. The "optimized party" needs a rogue-replacement, and that means a skillmonkey who can find traps. The list for that is pretty short, and Beguiler is fairly obvious as one of the most rogue-like and one of the most powerful. I went with Artificer because he makes everyone else awesome (and having awesome teammates is a wildly underrated class feature), and can function just fine as a trapfinder and skillmonkey. If Artificers couldn't find magical traps, or if they lacked Skill Enhancement Item infusions, I'd have no problem putting a Beguiler on the team. As it is, I like my choice.

(edit)

Disagreed. Artificers are bloody awesome skillmonkeys, and have a giant array of options to make them interesting. If you're sick of Blastificers, play with a focus on Effigies/Constructs, or debuffing, or buffing, or diplomancing (scrolls of Glibness ahoy), or skillmonkeying, or make yourself a Clockwork Armor and fight on the front lines, or mastermind from behind the scenes. You can't do all of those effectively at the same time (since each requires substantial gold investment), but you can pick and choose what suits you best. I'd say Artificers are even more flexible for playstyle than Factotums are, although maybe a little less adaptable.
An Artificer is an awesome skillmonkey ... if his magic isn't negated somehow (dead magic zone, an audience chamber carefully watched for "unauthorized magic", whatever). If you assume you won't need to have a full skillmonkey in a dead magic zone at some point, the Artificer is great. If you can assume that, though, most of the skillmonkey stuff you get from the Artificer can be handled just fine by a pairing of a Druid and a Wizard who pick the right feats for it. For instance, finding Magic traps isn't a problem - a Wizard can Permanency Arcane Sight. Finding mundane traps isn't a problem - the Elemental Summoning Reserve Feat finds them quite handily. Spotting things isn't a problem... the Druid gets both Spot and Listen (and most spies will be carrying enough magical gizmoes that the Wizard with a permanent Arcane Sight will spot them, no roll required, when they get within 120 feet). Scouting isn't a problem - a moderately expensive Third Eye Sense solves that issue nicely, familiars get nice bonuses to Hide due to their size, many of them have ranks in it, and even if the familiar is spotted, how likely is it that the locals are taking shots at every bat/rat/bird/cat that comes by? Charm Person/Charm Monster covers most of the social skills.

Me, I'm assuming that somewhere along the line, magic will fail to be of use; at which point, the Artificer has some difficulties. Now, granted, the Artificer definitely deserves a mention - but on my list, at least, he's the fifth member, not one of the main four.

Yukitsu
2009-02-28, 01:18 AM
I actually included the disciple of mystra for adventures that take place in dead magic zones. They aren't negated by dead or anti-magic fields.

sonofzeal
2009-02-28, 01:27 AM
An Artificer is an awesome skillmonkey ... if his magic isn't negated somehow (dead magic zone, an audience chamber carefully watched for "unauthorized magic", whatever). If you assume you won't need to have a full skillmonkey in a dead magic zone at some point, the Artificer is great. If you can assume that, though, most of the skillmonkey stuff you get from the Artificer can be handled just fine by a pairing of a Druid and a Wizard who pick the right feats for it. For instance, finding Magic traps isn't a problem - a Wizard can Permanency Arcane Sight. Finding mundane traps isn't a problem - the Elemental Summoning Reserve Feat finds them quite handily. Spotting things isn't a problem... the Druid gets both Spot and Listen (and most spies will be carrying enough magical gizmoes that the Wizard with a permanent Arcane Sight will spot them, no roll required, when they get within 120 feet). Scouting isn't a problem - a moderately expensive Third Eye Sense solves that issue nicely, familiars get nice bonuses to Hide due to their size, many of them have ranks in it, and even if the familiar is spotted, how likely is it that the locals are taking shots at every bat/rat/bird/cat that comes by? Charm Person/Charm Monster covers most of the social skills.

Me, I'm assuming that somewhere along the line, magic will fail to be of use; at which point, the Artificer has some difficulties. Now, granted, the Artificer definitely deserves a mention - but on my list, at least, he's the fifth member, not one of the main four.
What you're arguing for is an elimination of the "skillmonkey" roll entirely, which is entirely reasonable. However, do remember that the primary mechanism of the Artificer is making things cheaply. Effectively, with a good Artificer in the party, every party member can have up to 2.67 times as much gear. That's huge! A Wizard could spend everything he planned on spending, and then get an extra 15 "Pearls of Power level 9", just for a silly unoptimized example of just how much difference it makes.

...but yes, the Artificer can't generally do much in a dead magic zone. However, he still has high Int, Trapfinding (well, an equivalent at least), and Search and Disable Device as class skills. Even in a dead magic zone, the Artificer can be expected to do a reasonable job of substituting for a Rogue. And even if a "rogue" as a party role isn't necessary, no optimized party should be without a fully-trained crafter.

Jack_Simth
2009-02-28, 01:46 AM
What you're arguing for is an elimination of the "skillmonkey" roll entirely, which is entirely reasonable.
Kinda. The method came out of an exercise in how to avoid needing to rely on a rogue (incidentally, a Wizard *can* find traps from level 1, pure Core, although it's notably more expensive in terms of spell slots, but less in terms of feats, and having a proper Trapfinder in the party is cheaper). When magic is completely reliable, it works just fine. When it's not, not so much.

However, do remember that the primary mechanism of the Artificer is making things cheaply. Effectively, with a good Artificer in the party, every party member can have up to 2.67 times as much gear. That's huge! A Wizard could spend everything he planned on spending, and then get an extra 15 "Pearls of Power level 9", just for a silly unoptimized example of just how much difference it makes.

Assuming you have a DM who doesn't really look at Wealth By Level, sure. Assuming you purchase everything with full 20th level Wealth however you choose, sure. If you do have a DM who watches Wealth By Level, you'll very likely find yourself short on treasure drops to make up for it ... leaving you approximately where you would be without the artificer. If you pick up treasure to get to 20th in bits and pieces, you may find that all a Dedicated Crafter really does is customize the equipment to be a better fit... and the Wizard gets bonus feats which can go to exactly that.


...but yes, the Artificer can't generally do much in a dead magic zone. However, he still has high Int, Trapfinding (well, an equivalent at least), and Search and Disable Device as class skills. Even in a dead magic zone, the Artificer can be expected to do a reasonable job of substituting for a Rogue. And even if a "rogue" as a party role isn't necessary, no optimized party should be without a fully-trained crafter.
A Wizard can very easily be a fully-trained crafter. If you've got a party which includes a Wizard, a Cleric, a Druid, and a Beguiler, there's very few items you can't make anyway. With the Collaboration rules, you can even fill out the Wizard's spellbook surprisingly well. Artificer makes a great 5th party member.

Additionally, an Artificer needs a lot of down-time to be effective (without first picking up a Dedicated Wight or time-reducing feats, Crafting takes an 8-hour day for each 1,000 gp in market value). If your DM's playstyle precludes reasonable stretches of down-time, the Artificer won't do nearly so well. While a Wizard greatly benefits from lots of down-time (for the same basic reason the Artificer does), it's not nearly so required for the class to function.

sonofzeal
2009-02-28, 02:32 AM
Assuming you have a DM who doesn't really look at Wealth By Level, sure. Assuming you purchase everything with full 20th level Wealth however you choose, sure. If you do have a DM who watches Wealth By Level, you'll very likely find yourself short on treasure drops to make up for it ... leaving you approximately where you would be without the artificer. If you pick up treasure to get to 20th in bits and pieces, you may find that all a Dedicated Crafter really does is customize the equipment to be a better fit... and the Wizard gets bonus feats which can go to exactly that.
Most DMs I know don't go by either method strictly, but generally follow a "you earned it if you paid for it somehow" mentality. A crafter spends xp to boost gp, and hence deserves to keep that extra gp. More than xp, he's committed time, effort, and class features into making that stuff. A character who buys ladders and sells ten foot polls isn't really committing anything to the process and isn't losing anything in return, so he'll get whacked by the DM nerfbat. But if the Artificer has "earned" the right.


A Wizard can very easily be a fully-trained crafter. If you've got a party which includes a Wizard, a Cleric, a Druid, and a Beguiler, there's very few items you can't make anyway. With the Collaboration rules, you can even fill out the Wizard's spellbook surprisingly well. Artificer makes a great 5th party member.

Additionally, an Artificer needs a lot of down-time to be effective (without first picking up a Dedicated Wight or time-reducing feats, Crafting takes an 8-hour day for each 1,000 gp in market value). If your DM's playstyle precludes reasonable stretches of down-time, the Artificer won't do nearly so well. While a Wizard greatly benefits from lots of down-time (for the same basic reason the Artificer does), it's not nearly so required for the class to function.
Agreed the Artificer needs downtime. However, Dedicated Wrights are practically a class feature for them ("Craft Homunculus", specifically). My current Artificer, who I'm playing as a skillmonkey/buffer, has six of the buggers running around his lab at all times. He may make as many as twelve by level 15!

And yes, a Wizard can be a fully trained crafter too. But the Artificer gets a lot more out of it. Think of it this way - crafting for teammates sacrifices your level for extra income (assuming you make some sort of profit). A Wizard's main power comes from his spells, and a lost level means less spells of lower levels with less CR to back them up. An Artificer's main power comes from his items, and a lost level means... not much, generally. He can get more out of his items than the Wizard can, he can make them more easily and spend less xp, and he doesn't have to spend all his feats on it to do it. And a Wizard will never be able to craft some basic things like a "ring of protection" or "amulet of natural armor", because of the spell requirements. Warlock is the only other class I know that can ignore item creation restrictions, but Warlocks are generally mediocre at most levels, except for a few hyper-optimized builds.



In short, there's three reasons why I think Artificer belongs on the optimized team, even with just four...

- I think that any team with a solid crafter backing them up is going to be significantly stronger than a team without a solid crafter.

- I think that, while there's other classes that can do the job (Cleric, Warlock, Wizard), Artificers are by far the best crafters.

- I think the Artificer can contribute in a powerful way to any given team, over and above his ability to craft for everyone else, even if he sacrifices a level or two to do all that crafting.

BobVosh
2009-02-28, 02:39 AM
Deadly Gnome build: Essentially Gnome Beguiler, Shadowcraft Mage
Wizard: Wizard, whatever PrC you really feel like, I would go with War Weaver+ incantrix
Cleric: Full on DMM cheese, Clericzilla PrC however you feel like.
Druid: However you feel like optimizing Full Caster + Wildshape. You know, like Druid 20 + Natural spell.

Benefits: 4 full casters with 9th level spells, skill monkey, 2 tankish/beat sticks/whatever you buff them to do, wide variety of buffs, Low reliance on gear, Cleric+Druid can easy pull weight for marathon runs.

Cons: AMF can be like, real bad man.

Eldariel
2009-02-28, 02:41 AM
I'd go Wizard/Cleric/Druid/Artificer. Well, Wizard vs. Spells to Powers Erudite and Cleric vs. Archivist are interesting question, but at least one Druid and Artificer are musts. Cleric would be Initiate of Mystra/Dweomerkeeper and Druid would prolly go Planar Shepherd (barring that, just Druid 20). Artificer would stay in class and Wizard would go Incantatrix/Shadowcraft Mage. Erudite and Archivist lack as awesome multiclass alternatives, but they have other things to make up for it. One guy in the party has Mercantile Background. Now your wealth is a multiple of what it'd be for a normal party.

Also, it's worth thinking of Ur-Priest-build (Ur-Priest/Ruby Knight Vindicator is pretty brutal) would be better as the divine caster du jour as that class is busted, and Beholder Mage would obviously be the best Wizard if abusing Polymorph Any Object. Do note that the whole party would be just fine in anti-magic; Druid still has animal companion and all that, while Cleric's spells work just fine in AMF, Wizard has Invoke Magic and Artificer's Golem is perfectly AMF-usable (and there're few creatures that can stand up to a Greater Stone Golem in an AMF, let alone one supported by all sorts of magic in spite of Dead Magic Zone or whatever).

Graymayre
2009-02-28, 10:53 AM
Barbarian (yea, I said it)
Fighter (with feats in ranged and melee tactics)
Factotum
Artificer

Artificer is obvious. The factotum will take care of skills and diplomatic abilities. Barbarian is the main meatshield, and a good pick for transmutations spells (like tenser's transformation). Fighter is a back up meatshield with ranged capabilities.

Zen Master
2009-02-28, 11:24 AM
Optimized for what?

I'd say:

Fighter
Rogue
Cleric
Mage

You don't even need to minmax to make this group work. It's all packed and ready to go.

Advocate
2009-02-28, 03:03 PM
Optimized group? Artificer/Cleric/Druid/Wizard. Full stop. Add a Beguiler if you need a 5th man.

The Artificer gives everyone near triple wealth, at the least. It is possible to get craft costs much lower than that, further increasing this.

The Cleric and Druid are CoDzillas. Plenty of sustainability there. Especially since they actually have the stats to go beatsticking, so you aren't going to run out of spells on Heals as quickly. The Druid gets another beatstick as a class feature. Alternately, they could just cast, and win fights on round 1 beginning as early as level 1 what with Color Spray, Command, and Entangle. The Artificer at this time is using a Bane: Whatever you're fighting crossbow, which is a save or die at this level. Later on, you get even more options.

Wizard handles crowd control, though the Druid can do some too when outside.

The Wizard should be a Specialist if there is a Beguiler in the party. Ban evocation and enchantment. The former sucks, the latter is covered by the Beguiler. There isn't a good third choice for a ban, as many of the illusions you want are personal defenses, so the other guy having them doesn't matter, he can't use them on you. If you can think of one, why not Focused Specialist? Conjuration and Transmutation are both very good in either case. If there isn't, you could still go Specialist, or go Generalist. Either way.

Such a party can deal with... basically anything you throw at them, and any changes are just going to weaken the whole. Like introducing classes that can't keep up in a normal group, much less an optimized group for example. Don't do that.

AMF? Those shut down everyone, including beatsticks. Also, hurl orbs at the caster that gimped themselves heavily to groundbound themselves, and send in the AC as well.

Golems? Solved by the same things, except you can also throw in the better PC beatsticks.

Dead magic? Ignoring the fact this is just some DM handwave rocks fall type deal anyways, and the fact that shuts down most enemies as well as ALL of your own PCs, including the ones that have no place in an optimized group... no one says you have to adventure there, so just take a pass. Barring railroading, you skip out on that nonsense and can go do something else.

Deepblue706
2009-02-28, 05:26 PM
If they survive long enough: Wizard, Druid, Cleric, Artificer. As suggested by others who support this party construction, they're highly versatile and have great potential power. But, it takes a clever and seasoned group of players to make it work, if you're starting from level 1.

Woodsman
2009-02-28, 06:52 PM
An optimized party needs a melee, ranged, casting, healing, and skill-monkey character. Meat shields and support (bards) are helpful too.

Seriously, there needs to be physical combat. All caster parties get effectively screwed by anti-magic fields.

Yukitsu
2009-02-28, 07:01 PM
An optimized party needs a melee, ranged, casting, healing, and skill-monkey character. Meat shields and support (bards) are helpful too.

Seriously, there needs to be physical combat. All caster parties get effectively screwed by anti-magic fields.

No you don't, no they aren't, no there doesn't, and no they don't.

Every party needs the means to beat things at long, medium and close ranges, all parties need a means to survive and all parties need the means to bypass skill challenges. Casters can individually succeed in each task.

As for anti-magic, the animate dead line and the conjuration calling spells are the ones that defeat it, as do conjuration instantaneous effects such as orbs. In any event optimal party uses casters for ranged combat, clerics for melee and druids for melee and tanking. They also deal with healing. If you need to bypass a skill challenge, either boost skills with magic, or summon something to do the check for you.

Biffoniacus_Furiou
2009-02-28, 08:34 PM
I'm surprised nobody's mentioned a Cloistered Cleric with the Kobold domain yet for the Rogue replacement. An Illumian Beguiler 1/ Wizard 4/ Ultimate Magus 10 with Able Learner and 10/10 UM spellcasting into Wizard is also sufficient. Just make the party nothing but Tier 1 classes and you've won.

Druid
Cloistered Cleric or Ultimate Magus
Batman Wizard or another Druid or another Cleric
another Druid or another Cleric

Keld Denar
2009-02-28, 08:37 PM
Something I saw over on the CharOp boards

The A,B,C,Ds of CharOp

Artificer, Beguiler, Cleric, Druid

Leave out the wizard unless you change it to:

Archivist, Beguiler, Conjourer, Druid

That would be good...

Nohwl
2009-02-28, 11:00 PM
artificer, archivist, beguiler, wizard.

the artificer gives the party any item it could need, the archivist has a ridiculous spell list, and can get most of the spells from the wizards banned schools. the beguiler is there for skills and to help with utility, and the wizard would be best as a focused specialist. the archivist in the party can cast the spells, so why not?

woodenbandman
2009-02-28, 11:29 PM
What is this heresy about fighters and barbarians and rangers in optimized parties?

Core only optimized party is druid, druid, cleric, wizard, with the second druid having an option to go rogue1/druid19 instead. Although, really, there is no need for a rogue. If you have 2 druids, you have listen and spot, so you're good there, and who ever died from a trap?

Outside core, I'd go with Wizard, Archivist/Cleric, Druid, and Ted the Enabler (factotum8/chameleon10/feat rogue2). Wizard takes arcane duties, Archivist takes over full divine caster (and says pretty please with the druid player to get him/her to take scribe scroll in exchange for taking up the buffing duties), and also pulls the role of secondary archer if he can get divine metamagic persistent spells. The druid and animal companion are obviously the beatsticks. Ted the enabler, besides finding traps and handling all skill duties, can fill in as a second whatever. He is the primary archer build (hey, extra standard actions for another Manyshot, if you can afford it), he gets the wizard to learn Heroics so he can prepare it, and he can craft items/save people's lives when they're in trouble/do whatever is needed in the party. In fact, a fairly optimized party would be Ted the Enabler and his brothers, Groucho, Zeppo, and those other two.

EDIT: ARCHIVISTS cannot get wizard spells. That's a dumb TO argument about the archivist's power and there is no way that the DM will let you just go buy any spell you want from a level 20 Geomancer10/Cleric3/Wizard7. They get cleric and druid spells and THAT'S IT

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-02-28, 11:38 PM
They get cleric and druid spells and THAT'S ITAnd Paladin, Ranger, Adept, Divine Bard, and a few other's spells. The beauty of the Archivist is that all they need to learn a spell from another class is 8 hours with a member of that class. So, with a few weeks in a metropolis they should be able to pick up almost any spell of 5th level or lower, and at the lowest level the spell is available. And really, is your DM going to say you can't find a Ranger anywhere in his campaign willing to spend 8 hours with you crafting a scroll in exchange for a bit of cash?

monty
2009-02-28, 11:54 PM
EDIT: ARCHIVISTS cannot get wizard spells. That's a dumb TO argument about the archivist's power and there is no way that the DM will let you just go buy any spell you want from a level 20 Geomancer10/Cleric3/Wizard7. They get cleric and druid spells and THAT'S IT

What Sstoopidtallkid said, and remember that cleric spells include domains. The majority of good wizard spells are also in at least one domain, which makes them fair game for an archivist. That's why they're so good.

The Glyphstone
2009-03-01, 12:08 AM
The only thing stopping Artificer+Archivist from being a COMBO BREAKER is that obscure ruling that says Artificer scrolls are neither divine nor arcane, and so the archivist can't scribe them into his book. Without that the two would be a monster combination.

Emperor Tippy
2009-03-01, 12:50 AM
At level 20, and since you banned planar Shepherd:

Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5 (if 5 members).

Everyone in the party is under the effects (at all times) of Shapechange, Iron Guard, Ghost Walk, and every other buff (even rounds/level ones) that might be remotely helpful.

And then they go the pokeball route. Meaning that each one rides around on a Great Wrym Gold Dragon (prismatic dragon if you are allowed) with two Solars as body guards (all Solars and dragons are also under the effects of all the buffs). Thanks to the Solars the party also gains all of the cleric buffs.

horseboy
2009-03-01, 05:38 AM
Well, it does depend on campaign. For LG there's two optimized groups my buddies used to use.
Group #1
Cleric of Cuthbert
Cleric of travel guy
Cleric of can't remember
Ranger of the Gnarley.

Group #2
Trip Monkey fighter
Barbarian/scout/dred commando
Rage Mage duel wielding wands of enfeeblement
Mystic Thruege of Wee Jas.

Either group will crush a standard LG module in an hour or so. They're around 8-13 depending on which character.

Doomsy
2009-03-01, 06:18 AM
Frenzied berserker, full party.

Optimized for brevity and brutality, right?

And technically, everybody is their own BBEG, so easy planning.

Advocate
2009-03-01, 08:02 AM
If they survive long enough: Wizard, Druid, Cleric, Artificer. As suggested by others who support this party construction, they're highly versatile and have great potential power. But, it takes a clever and seasoned group of players to make it work, if you're starting from level 1.

At level 1, the Wizard has 2 Color Sprays (save or lose for the whole encounter), and perhaps 3 or 4 if he has Int 20 and/or is specialized. The Druid has Entangle, multiple times. The Cleric has Command multiple times, and a CLW wand via gold pooling. The Artificer has a Bane: Whatever you're fighting crossbow, which does 1d8 + 2d6+2 (average 13.5 damage) and is therefore a save or die, vs AC. Not hard at all. Probably easier than a typical party.

Flickerdart
2009-03-01, 10:42 AM
Well, it does depend on campaign. For LG there's two optimized groups my buddies used to use.
Group #1
Cleric of Cuthbert
Cleric of travel guy
Cleric of can't remember
Ranger of the Gnarley.

Group #2
Trip Monkey fighter
Barbarian/scout/dred commando
Rage Mage duel wielding wands of enfeeblement
Mystic Thruege of Wee Jas.

Either group will crush a standard LG module in an hour or so. They're around 8-13 depending on which character.
A Mystic Theurge is one of the weakest spellcasting PrCs. Fighters are weak, Dread Commandos become irrelevant when things start being immune to Fear, and Rage Mages aren't that great either (although Enfeeblement is good). The only reason the first party still passes for optimized is because you have 3 Clerics. Either you're not playing the monsters correctly ("Everyone rush the 5' square of difficult terrain!") or they're overlevelled/over WBL for the module. Or they're intended to be short. If those guys can get through it with so quickly, Tippy would probably take all of 5 minutes.

Neithan
2009-03-01, 10:50 AM
fighter, bard, monk, sorcerer :P

I can see some very awsome campaigns with a group like that.:smallbiggrin:

Fan
2009-03-01, 10:52 AM
At level 20, and since you banned planar Shepherd:

Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5 (if 5 members).

Everyone in the party is under the effects (at all times) of Shapechange, Iron Guard, Ghost Walk, and every other buff (even rounds/level ones) that might be remotely helpful.

And then they go the pokeball route. Meaning that each one rides around on a Great Wrym Gold Dragon (prismatic dragon if you are allowed) with two Solars as body guards (all Solars and dragons are also under the effects of all the buffs). Thanks to the Solars the party also gains all of the cleric buffs.

This, easily.
As it does anything, and everything that anyother class can do BETTER.

monty
2009-03-01, 01:12 PM
If those guys can get through it with so quickly, Tippy would probably take all of 5 minutes.

That seems like a pretty conservative estimate to me.

Flickerdart
2009-03-01, 01:20 PM
That seems like a pretty conservative estimate to me.
Not if he's limited to ECL 5 below the recommended.

Eldariel
2009-03-01, 01:21 PM
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5
Domain Wizard 5/ Incantatrix 10/ Archmage 5 (if 5 members).

Archmage over Shadowcraft Mage? Really?

monty
2009-03-01, 01:26 PM
Archmage over Shadowcraft Mage? Really?

Archmage lets you do things like persist all your touch spells (Arcane Reach for a fixed 30' range). Also, ScM has trouble against anything with spell resistance. Overall, a better choice at high levels.

Edit: Also, it requires you to be a gnome, and who wants to do that?

Advocate
2009-03-01, 01:45 PM
A Wizard with SR issues... wait, what?

Eldariel
2009-03-01, 02:10 PM
Archmage lets you do things like persist all your touch spells (Arcane Reach for a fixed 30' range). Also, ScM has trouble against anything with spell resistance. Overall, a better choice at high levels.

Edit: Also, it requires you to be a gnome, and who wants to do that?

Surely having infinite Miracles makes up for that? Oh, and Reach Spell coupled with Incantatrix works rather fine for persisting your touch spells.

mostlyharmful
2009-03-01, 02:24 PM
Surely having infinite Miracles makes up for that? Oh, and Reach Spell coupled with Incantatrix works rather fine for persisting your touch spells.

You can also get the reach Arcana the first level of Archmage you take and do all the party need to be able to reach persist buff? Surely some of them can be casting the stuff that just needs to be persisted? or just start using rods?

But yeah, for any given level of cheese permited Tippys party wins.

The Glyphstone
2009-03-01, 02:58 PM
Y'know, if Planar Shepherd is banned for the terms of the discussion, I think Gateraped Solars are likewise pushing the limits...:smallamused:

Eldariel
2009-03-01, 03:02 PM
You can also get the reach Arcana the first level of Archmage you take and do all the party need to be able to reach persist buff? Surely some of them can be casting the stuff that just needs to be persisted? or just start using rods?

But yeah, for any given level of cheese permited Tippys party wins.

I'd still say replacing Archmage-levels with Shadowcraft Mage-levels would be an improvement. Who doesn't want spontaneous access to almost all spells with nigh' infinite spell slots?

horseboy
2009-03-01, 04:02 PM
("Everyone rush the 5' square of difficult terrain!") or they're overlevelled/over WBL for the module. Or they're intended to be short. If those guys can get through it with so quickly, Tippy would probably take all of 5 minutes.Technically it's 30' (took a cleric dip to cast his own Enlarge person:smallwink:) of Hold the Line. There is one other option. We're that good. Granted player skill is much harder to quantify, though. You combine a good player with mechanical cheese and you don't even need a full party. Just grab a gnome illusionist/whatever. They can solo a whole party's worth of crap.

Nohwl
2009-03-01, 05:21 PM
EDIT: ARCHIVISTS cannot get wizard spells. That's a dumb TO argument about the archivist's power and there is no way that the DM will let you just go buy any spell you want from a level 20 Geomancer10/Cleric3/Wizard7. They get cleric and druid spells and THAT'S IT

theres a favored soul variant that allows you to cast a few wizard spells (you pick from the list) of level 6 or lower. so you can have one favored soul casting color spray, another one casting sleep, another one casting haste, etc. so you can learn all level 6 wizard spells that way. shugenja from complete divine and spirit shaman have a few spells that are normally arcane only. you have divine magician, it makes 3 schools of wizard spells divine. if you are are including 3.0, hexer can give all wizard spells. if not, theres a feat that turns arcane spells into divine ones. you might be able to argue that alternative source makes arcane spells divine. im not sure if the domains have been mentioned yet, but they are divine too. you get a lot of arcane spells from them too. there are other ones that im missing, but thats because my dm just says hexer is allowed to simplify it.

you can get the spells at the lowest level allowed too. for example, heal is a level 5 adept spell, normally its a level 6 cleric spell. youre getting it 2 levels earlier. anti magic field is a level 6 spell from the protection domain, clerics get it as an 8th level spell, so thats 4 levels sooner. compared to a generalist wizard, you get one more spell per day too.

to learn them, you dont need a person of another class. just knowledge of the spell. theres a spell called secret page. it basically hides writing and can turn it into something else. including other spells. so you can get spells that way. or you could take leadership and get a warlock cohort. at level 12 they get an ability that allows them to make arcane or divine stuff.

now what you do with the archivist is you go into dweomerkeeper. qualification is a bit annoying, but a 2 level dip into singer of concordance(getting the requirements for that isnt too bad, just use the dragonborn template) will give you the magic domain, and if you are elven or human you can take the feat magical training for the arcane spells needed. take a level dip into sacred exorcist and you get turn undead too.

so you have a character that has a very large spell list, you can cast 4 spells a day that dont require anything (no xp cost for wish is pretty nice), you are using divine metamagic, and you havent lost one level in spell casting.

dspeyer
2009-03-01, 05:32 PM
But yeah, for any given level of cheese permited Tippys party wins.

So the optimized party is Tippy, Pun-Pun, The Omnificer and Pelor? With the killer gnome as fifth wheel?

I realize Pelor isn't a build, but I don't recall a divine build on par with the others, so he seemed to fit.

Keld Denar
2009-03-01, 05:48 PM
So the optimized party is Tippy, Pun-Pun, The Omnificer and Pelor? With the killer gnome as fifth wheel?

I realize Pelor isn't a build, but I don't recall a divine build on par with the others, so he seemed to fit.

They just bring Pelor along because he whines when he has to play by himself. They give him some minor loot every once in a while to keep him happy and shut him up, but otherwise he doesn't really bring anything meaningful to the table.

lulz

Curmudgeon
2009-03-01, 05:54 PM
Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Rogue.

The Rogue is key. Lacking that role you can burn up all your spells going through a trap dungeon and be on empty when you get to the big battle. At higher levels the Rogue is using wands, staves, and scrolls via Use Magic Device to crank out the magic, same as all the others.

Cleric, Druid, and animal companion handle most of the fighting at low levels. At high levels the Druid's Maximized Control Weather (cast every other day) makes enemies have to go through 3 miles of grief just to get to you, and Control Winds neutralizes flying foes.

The Cleric adds versatility: spells that the Wizard lacks, ability to tank up, and healing because you're not going to get by unscathed.

Eldariel
2009-03-01, 05:56 PM
The Rogue is key. Lacking that role you can burn up all your spells going through a trap dungeon and be on empty when you get to the big battle. At higher levels the Rogue is using wands, staves, and scrolls via Use Magic Device to crank out the magic, same as all the others.

Why not an Artificer? Trapfinding and all that, wealth multiplication and Wizardly power to boot. Oh, and some of the best buffing in the game, available earlier than Incantatrix.

Keld Denar
2009-03-01, 05:57 PM
Why not an Artificer? Trapfinding and all that, wealth multiplication and Wizardly power to boot. Oh, and some of the best buffing in the game, available earlier than Incantatrix.

Or Beguiler? Arguably more skill points than a rogue due to the higher priority on Int, actual IS a full caster, and also has UMD on his skill list.

Eldariel
2009-03-01, 06:03 PM
Or Beguiler? Arguably more skill points than a rogue due to the higher priority on Int, actual IS a full caster, and also has UMD on his skill list.

Doesn't multiply your WPL (Artificer has Craft Reserve + Retain Essence + potential Tools of War or whatever; oh, and all crafting as bonus feats). Due to Metamagic Item + Eternal Wand + Persistent Spell, Artificer is a fiendishly efficient buffer. And he actually gets Take 10 in UMD without sucking. Oh, and though it burns cash, they can also make fiendishly efficient offensive casters (and they can mimic all Wizardly spells in addition to their bunch of unique Infusions). Next best thing, definitely, but I'd much rather take an Artificer.

Beguiler/Incantatrix/Shadowcraft Mage is definitely potent though, but that relies on a questionable reading of Incantatrix (EDIT: and is one level behind which causes all sorts of problems for a 5/10/5 build wanting two capstones; I always forget that little detail). Shadowcrafter/Shadowcraft Mage works, I guess, but that means you're not Incantatrix, which outweights any possible boons you could gain.

Advocate
2009-03-01, 06:17 PM
Rogues cannot reliably disarm level appropriate, dangerous traps. And by reliably, I mean something like... 80% fail rate. Maybe higher. Also, they need Take 20 Searches just to find them.

Artificer/Cloistered Cleric with Kobold domain/whatever uses Detect Magic to find the dangerous traps automatically, then removes them with a Dispel, or boosts their skill before doing a DD check so it actually works. The non dangerous ones don't require any particular resource expenditure. The difference between them is that the dangerous traps are the magic traps. These are also the ones hardest to find, as mundane DCs cap at 27. Spells go up to 34, and that's just at level 10. 13 + Int < 34. Same for the lower level spells at lower levels.

Eldariel
2009-03-01, 06:27 PM
I like Artificer since you can base them off Int from which you derive Search & Disable Device for when you end up using them. The higher the mods, the better chances even without magic.

Heck, they could actually do the CR10 traps on level 10 with decent chance of success without actually using spells (13+7-8 Int (for basic classes)+2 Tools+5 Gloves of Manual Dexterity/Lens of Detection = trivially +27, meaning only 1 or 2 would trigger the trap). That said, of course there's no sense in risking the die roll if you have alternatives.

Advocate
2009-03-01, 06:32 PM
The trap is DC 34. You could easily cover with take 10 though. Skill enhancement gives +7 circumstance at this level. Replaces tools and items.

Eldariel
2009-03-01, 06:39 PM
The trap is DC 34. You could easily cover with take 10 though. Skill enhancement gives +7 circumstance at this level. Replaces tools and items.

You only blow up the trap if you fail by 5 or more, so only possible results that cause that are 28 or 29. But yeah. Skill boosts are generally competence and thus stack with Skill Enhancement (it overlaps with Tools though). I purposedly didn't use it as I wanted to get the numbers you have all day long; using skill enhancement would mean you'd succeed on 2 (and if you had even 1 point of morale, luck, racial Int-bonus, or anything else from any source, you'd succeed on 1).

Jack_Simth
2009-03-01, 06:55 PM
Rogues cannot reliably disarm level appropriate, dangerous traps.
Huh?

For a magic trap, the DC is a fixed 25 + spell level. Caps out at DC 34 (a CR 10 Magic trap). At, say, 7th (about the lowest level you should be facing a CR 10 trap), a Rogue with maximum ranks in Search and Disable Device, plus a few inexpensive Core items and a feat or two, can pretty easily have enough of a modifier that taking 10 deals with them. Seriously.

Goggles of Minute Seeing (+5 Competence to Search), and a Lens of Detection (+5 Unnamed), 10 ranks (+10), and an Int of, say, 12, and Skill Focus (Search) gives a Search modifier of +24 - enough to make a DC 34 Search check taking ten. Both items are pretty inexpensive.

Oh, wait - that's for search - still Disable Device is doable as well, it's just a little trickier ... and it's often not needed - you can disable a trap simply by mechanically destroying it in most cases.

And simply knowing where a trap is and how it's triggered usually permits you to bypass it without even doing that in most cases.



The big problem is that mechanical traps are fairly arbitrary - arbitrary Search and Disable Device DC's (it's +200 gp for the value per point in either above 20). Likewise, they can get arbitrary damage amounts, and can be no-save never-miss.

And by reliably, I mean something like... 80% fail rate. Maybe higher. Also, they need Take 20 Searches just to find them.

Apparently, you've never seen a Rogue make an actual investment into the skills beyond some skill points.


Artificer/Cloistered Cleric with Kobold domain/whatever uses Detect Magic to find the dangerous traps automatically, then removes them with a Dispel, or boosts their skill before doing a DD check so it actually works.
Read the description of the Magic Aura spell, and despair. Note that neither Detect Magic nor it's big brother Arcane Sight can penetrate a thin sheet of lead, think of all the ways that could be used to prevent you from finding a trap until you step on it, and despair.

You're assuming Detect Magic is sufficient because you haven't run across a DM that uses traps creatively. Now, granted, all the magic traps listed in the DMG (and by extension, most randomly-generated traps) will be findable this way. But the rules give the DM quite a bit of freedom in making sure this doesn't work.

The non dangerous ones don't require any particular resource expenditure. The difference between them is that the dangerous traps are the magic traps. These are also the ones hardest to find, as mundane DCs cap at 27
Correction: The DMG Pre-generated DC's cap at 27. If you go through and read the trap-creation guidelines, there is no cap (neither on Search DC, nor Disable Device DC, nor in damage). Thing is, when players get creative, the DM starts looking for ways to get creative too...

. Spells go up to 34, and that's just at level 10. 13 + Int < 34. Same for the lower level spells at lower levels.
Goggles of Minute Seeing and a Lens of Detection are actually pretty cheap items at level 10. Incidentally, the spell needed to craft them is True Seeing, which is available from the Cleric for Collaborative creation at level 9, if you haven't had the opportunity to visit a shop that will let you purchase them by then.

Curmudgeon
2009-03-01, 07:04 PM
Rogues cannot reliably disarm level appropriate, dangerous traps. And by reliably, I mean something like... 80% fail rate. Maybe higher. Also, they need Take 20 Searches just to find them. You're not playing your Rogues right. You get bonuses all over the place. Ability boosting items are obvious, of course. If you're an Elf (an obvious Rogue choice because of their DEX bonus) you get a racial +2 bonus to Search. And you get a +2 circumstance bonus just from masterwork tools. Goggles of Minute Seeing give a +5 competence bonus on Search checks. A Lens of Detection grants an untyped +5 bonus on Search checks, so that stacks. Skill Mastery lets a Rogue "take 10" on every mastered skill regardless of circumstances, and Savvy Rogue (Complete Scoundrel) lets you instead "take 12". So Search is pretty much guaranteed to succeed, all the time -- and that's the key skill, not Disable Device.

A Chronocharm of the Laughing Rogue (Magic Item Compendium) lets you reroll a Disable Device check after you determine success or failure. (They're cheap, so you can buy several.) A Ghost Gauntlet (DMG2) grants a +5 bonus to Disable Device checks.

You can get assistance from allies, too. Once you know a trap is present (from your boosted Search skill) you'll know generally how tough it is to disable (since most traps have identical DCs for Search and Disable Device). You can ask your Cleric for Guidance of the Avatar (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/sb/sb20010504a) to get +20 to your Disable Device check. Or you can just smash the thing, or block the weapons from releasing.

I ran a 10th-level party through Tomb of Horrors with a properly optimized Rogue. All traps except the "presence" (i.e., it goes off if you're in the room, with no DC specified) traps were automatic successes for him. Changed the dynamic of the module quite a bit.

Kroy
2009-03-01, 07:11 PM
Optimized for what?

I'd say:

Fighter
Rogue
Cleric
Mage

You don't even need to minmax to make this group work. It's all packed and ready to go.

Huh? There isn't even a mage class! And, that's about as far from optimized as a blaster and three monks.

Jack_Simth
2009-03-01, 07:14 PM
Huh? There isn't even a mage class! And, that's about as far from optimized as a blaster and three monks.
There's a reason Acromos started out that post with "Optimized for what?" You'll understand his point once you figure out why he started the post with that question.

monty
2009-03-02, 12:49 AM
Surely having infinite Miracles makes up for that? Oh, and Reach Spell coupled with Incantatrix works rather fine for persisting your touch spells.

Adding Reach Spell means you're burning uses of your metamagic abilities, or adding at least +1 to most of your spell levels (without Arcane Thesis, you're not getting it below +1, and you'll have many more buffs than spare feats). Archmage does it as much as you want for free.

Miracle at all is a questionable rules interpretation, and while I'm not familiar with how to get an infinite number of them, doing so is likely to get you kicked in the nads.

Eldariel
2009-03-02, 06:21 AM
Miracle at all is a questionable rules interpretation, and while I'm not familiar with how to get an infinite number of them, doing so is likely to get you kicked in the nads.

Even without Miracles, you'll have spontaneous access to 3 schools. I think that's worth having to burn spell levels for persisting especially since you can get them back. And getting kicked in the nads...we're already playing Incantatrix, I don't think your DM is physically capable of kicking you in the nads since you got that far.

As for the spell recursion, Echoing Spell from Secrets of Xen'drik. Due to the framework of the build, it's either a +1 metamagic, or +0 depending on whether you want to sink a feat into Easy/Practical Metamagic or not. It makes your spell slots recurring, at -4 CL. Of course, thanks to Earth Spell and Residual Magic, that -4, -8 & -12 is still Easily High Enough.


I've got the funny feeling I've told that to you before.

Advocate
2009-03-02, 08:00 AM
And... the replies I get are for the most part hilarious, and consist of 'torching a good bit of WBL and a feat' and that only helps with the Search check, which you could take 10 on without investment (it just won't work) and take 20 on without risk. It doesn't address Disable Device, which is the real problem.

As for traps, ignoring DM power trip BS, traps have trivial effects anyways, so the caster team is still better because they make the saves more often. Also, the mundane traps are stuff like... pits, which everyone has completely stopped caring about long before they stop appearing.

And if you really want to get into being creative with traps, we can discuss the traps that you're supposed to intentionally set off, to disable a second trap that gives no warning because the creator is a Magnificent Bastard. Rogue still useless. Or perhaps ones you simply can't do anything to until you trigger them, such as a Symbol of Death on the inside of a door that activates when you walk through the door, and the entire area is Dimensional Anchored. Be a caster or die.

The next one is even worse, as it recommends the same things + being one of the worst races in the game, then he goes on to completely miss the point both by calling Search the main skill despite the fact you can retry that one, and by asking the Cleric for help... remember, optimized group? Rogue is not supposed to be here in the first place. If he needs the Cleric to do it all for him anyways, then the Cleric can just boot him out. Also, part of your advice is blatantly false. Read the description of Chronocharms again, and you will see how you misquoted their abilities.

Now, remember, optimized group. The guy who has to torch most of his WBL, a feat, and be a terrible race just to barely do his job flat out cannot compete with the guys who can just pop an Immediate action and make it happen, or pop 1 round and a low level infusion up to 3 hours, 20 minutes ago. Also, those other guys get to do other stuff.

Rogues have no place in an optimized party.

Jack_Simth
2009-03-02, 08:30 AM
[/QUOTE]


And... the replies I get are for the most part hilarious, and consist of 'torching a good bit of WBL and a feat' and that only helps with the Search check, which you could take 10 on without investment (it just won't work) and take 20 on without risk. It doesn't address Disable Device, which is the real problem.

'torching a good bit of WBL'?

Googles of Minute Seeing are 1,250 gp, a Lens of Detection is 3,500. With both, the "total" is 4,750 gp. At 10th, that's maybe 10%.


As for traps, ignoring DM power trip BS,
I explicitly say "when players get creative, the DM starts looking for ways to get creative too" and you say it's "DM power trip BS"? Interesting. It's part of the DM's job to makes things a mite uncertain. If you're simply blowing through encounters, the DM needs to up the encounter difficulty - regardless of whether that's combat, social, stealth, or trap encounters.


traps have trivial effects anyways, so the caster team is still better because they make the saves more often. Also, the mundane traps are stuff like... pits, which everyone has completely stopped caring about long before they stop appearing.

Casters are usually more effective, yes... but that's why I tend to reccommend a Beguiler, rather than a Rogue, for optimization exercises.

Mostly, though, traps in isolation are boring in general. They're... two rolls (Search, Disable Device - and the party usually takes 10 or 20 on Search so there isn't a roll), and either move on, or suffer the result of a failed roll and move on. If the party can routinely deal with them, they're barely a blip on the radar. If the party can't routinely deal with them, they're nothing but an annoying bit of resource burn... and still barely a blip on the radar.

Nah, to make traps interesting, they need to be in combination with creatures. The Inflict X wounds trap on the floor of a room, paired with an undead. That's memorable. The batch of item-buffed mooks inviting a quick Area Dispel... in an area where the ceiling is made out of rock resulting from a Transmute Mud to Rock spell. That's memorable. The Wail of the Baneshee trap that was simply neutralized in the hallway? Nobody remembers it next session ... except maybe the guy that got his character killed by it. Maybe.


And if you really want to get into being creative with traps, we can discuss the traps that you're supposed to intentionally set off, to disable a second trap that gives no warning because the creator is a Magnificent Bastard. Rogue still useless. Or perhaps ones you simply can't do anything to until you trigger them, such as a Symbol of Death on the inside of a door that activates when you walk through the door, and the entire area is Dimensional Anchored. Be a caster or die.

The rogue trapfinding ability specifically says the rogue gets a chance to find things prior to them going off. If the DM is bypassing that when the rogue is actively searching, he's house-ruling away the Rogue's class feature. Thus, without house-rules to the contrary, the Rogue can (and will, if he takes his trapfinder role seriously) find the Flesh to Stone trap behind the leaded wall at a level where the Wizard can't have countermeasures up 24/7.

Rogues have no place in an optimized party.They can, they very much can. Beguilers and Artificers usually do it better... but there's exceptions.

Curmudgeon
2009-03-02, 10:57 AM
The next one is even worse, as it recommends the same things + being one of the worst races in the game, then he goes on to completely miss the point both by calling Search the main skill As "the next one", I guess I should respond to your rant.

Of course Search is the important skill, because
You can't do anything to avoid a trap if you can't find it first.
A thin sheet of lead, or Nystul's Magic Aura, effectively camouflages magical traps from Detect Magic, so Search is key.
Disable Device describes lots of ways you can handle traps besides using the skill itself:
It’s possible to ruin many traps without making a Disable Device check.


despite the fact you can retry that one,
Yes, you can retry Search, which means you're going to "take 20", meaning take 2 minutes for every 5' square. How is that optimized? You're going to slow down to a maximum of 240 squares per adventuring day? :smallyuk:

and by asking the Cleric for help... remember, optimized group?
Yes, optimized group, which includes a Cleric (Wizard, Druid, Cleric, Rogue).

Rogue is not supposed to be here in the first place. If he needs the Cleric to do it all for him anyways, then the Cleric can just boot him out. How is occasionally working together even remotely like the Cleric doing it all? The Cleric doesn't have enough spells to find and overcome traps all day long. The Cleric does have enough spells to aid other party members when they need it -- with healing, buffing, or skill augmentation.

Also, part of your advice is blatantly false. Read the description of Chronocharms again, and you will see how you misquoted their abilities.
(They're cheap, so you can buy several.) Did I say you would buy several for yourself? No, you buy several for the party. Remember, it's an optimized party, not individual optimized characters. That's the part you don't seem to be able to comprehend.

Advocate
2009-03-02, 11:18 AM
'torching a good bit of WBL'?

Googles of Minute Seeing are 1,250 gp, a Lens of Detection is 3,500. With both, the "total" is 4,750 gp. At 10th, that's maybe 10%.

One of the examples was level 7. 25% for basic competence. Even if it is slightly under 10% at level 10 instead (which doesn't cover the lower levels, when the DCs are only 1 point lower a level) still. Spend a good chunk of WBL for basic competence, or get the guy who can do that for free, near triple everyone's WBL, and do some other awesome stuff? No contest.


I explicitly say "when players get creative, the DM starts looking for ways to get creative too" and you say it's "DM power trip BS"? Interesting. It's part of the DM's job to makes things a mite uncertain. If you're simply blowing through encounters, the DM needs to up the encounter difficulty - regardless of whether that's combat, social, stealth, or trap encounters.

Nerfing abilities simply because they work = power trip BS. Also, manual searching takes so long even the Rogue is best off going the Detect Magic approach, so as to avoid the Countdown to Awesome running out. Just trigger the trap intentionally, you'll be better off.


Mostly, though, traps in isolation are boring in general. They're... two rolls (Search, Disable Device - and the party usually takes 10 or 20 on Search so there isn't a roll), and either move on, or suffer the result of a failed roll and move on. If the party can routinely deal with them, they're barely a blip on the radar. If the party can't routinely deal with them, they're nothing but an annoying bit of resource burn... and still barely a blip on the radar.

Yes they are. Another point against Rogues.


Nah, to make traps interesting, they need to be in combination with creatures. The Inflict X wounds trap on the floor of a room, paired with an undead. That's memorable. The batch of item-buffed mooks inviting a quick Area Dispel... in an area where the ceiling is made out of rock resulting from a Transmute Mud to Rock spell. That's memorable. The Wail of the Baneshee trap that was simply neutralized in the hallway? Nobody remembers it next session ... except maybe the guy that got his character killed by it. Maybe.

Ok. And these are times you can't do anything about the traps, which is another point against the Rogue.


The rogue trapfinding ability specifically says the rogue gets a chance to find things prior to them going off. If the DM is bypassing that when the rogue is actively searching, he's house-ruling away the Rogue's class feature. Thus, without house-rules to the contrary, the Rogue can (and will, if he takes his trapfinder role seriously) find the Flesh to Stone trap behind the leaded wall at a level where the Wizard can't have countermeasures up 24/7.
They can, they very much can. Beguilers and Artificers usually do it better... but there's exceptions.

O rly?


Trapfinding

Rogues (and only rogues) can use the Search skill to locate traps when the task has a Difficulty Class higher than 20.

Finding a nonmagical trap has a DC of at least 20, or higher if it is well hidden. Finding a magic trap has a DC of 25 + the level of the spell used to create it.

Rogues (and only rogues) can use the Disable Device skill to disarm magic traps. A magic trap generally has a DC of 25 + the level of the spell used to create it.

A rogue who beats a trap’s DC by 10 or more with a Disable Device check can study a trap, figure out how it works, and bypass it (with her party) without disarming it.

Beguilers, Artificers, etc have the same Trapfinding ability. Which doesn't say that.

Flesh to Stone trap at level 6:

Rogue makes checks, doesn't get anywhere close to 30.

DM: You detect nothing.

Rogue: Hey guys, it's safe. *walks forward, gets to make DC 17 Fortitude save*

There are no exceptions, and there is no place for vastly suboptimal characters so as to be below basic competence levels in a normal group, much less an optimized one.

Edit: Again, Rogues have no place in an optimized group. Stop it.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-03-02, 11:44 AM
@Curmudgeon:
The question isn't whether the Rogue can find traps, the question is whether he's better at it than his replacements(Beguiler, Artificer). The Beguiler is a Full-caster who gets more skill points and all sorts of spells to replace skills, and the Artificer is a permanent boost to the party's WBL. And both of them can find traps in the exact same manner as a Rogue, the difference being that they can do other stuff, too.

AgentPaper
2009-03-02, 12:12 PM
There is a place for a rogue in an optimized party. As a 1-level dip for trapfinding and 1d6 SA. Maybe 2 levels if you want non-magical evasion and aren't getting it from another source. Assuming that you don't just go for a cleric with the kobold domain, of course.

As for detect magic and lead, that's definitely something you should expect in an optimized campaign. You're smart, so your enemies should be able to be as well. I find it funny that you call this "DM power-tripping" but a trap that's undetectable "because the creator is a magnificent bastard" is just fine. Any trap is detectable by search, how well it's hidden just makes the DC harder. Yes, that includes your symbol of death on the other side of the door. Really really hard to spot? Yes. Impossible? No. How is it possible? Hell if I know, but I don't have +40 to search and trapfinding, now do I? :smallamused:

Advocate
2009-03-02, 12:21 PM
There is a place for a rogue in an optimized party. As a 1-level dip for trapfinding and 1d6 SA. Maybe 2 levels if you want non-magical evasion and aren't getting it from another source. Assuming that you don't just go for a cleric with the kobold domain, of course.

As for detect magic and lead, that's definitely something you should expect in an optimized campaign. You're smart, so your enemies should be able to be as well. I find it funny that you call this "DM power-tripping" but a trap that's undetectable "because the creator is a magnificent bastard" is just fine. Any trap is detectable by search, how well it's hidden just makes the DC harder. Yes, that includes your symbol of death on the other side of the door. Really really hard to spot? Yes. Impossible? No. How is it possible? Hell if I know, but I don't have +40 to search and trapfinding, now do I? :smallamused:

Can you see through stone? Nope? Too bad. You can see it if you pass through the door, but by now it's already triggered on you. In fact, it'd be pretty easy to see and defeat from the other side of the door, seeing as symbols have to be in plain sight to do any good, and a sheet 100% negates them. That of course, is why they are used in such a way so as to not waste 5k. Get death immunity or die.

Also, optimized campaigns don't need suboptimal levels.

Ignoring your straw man.

Eldariel
2009-03-02, 12:53 PM
There is a place for a rogue in an optimized party. As a 1-level dip for trapfinding and 1d6 SA. Maybe 2 levels if you want non-magical evasion and aren't getting it from another source. Assuming that you don't just go for a cleric with the kobold domain, of course.

To reiterate, both Beguiler & Artificer get Trapfinding on level 1, so if you really, really want a Trapfinder, get one of those (although getting an Artificer automatically makes the party much, much better anyways which is why I keep specifying it as the optimal trapfinder - you aren't taking it for Trapfinding, you're taking it for Good Stuff™ and get Trapfinding as a bonus). Why else would they be considered replacements? They beat out Cloistered Cleric by the virtue of being naturally Int-based, although I wouldn't hold the extra Cleric against you either (since Clerics kick ass).

monty
2009-03-02, 01:08 PM
I've got the funny feeling I've told that to you before.

I remember this trick, which is definitely finite. You said "infinite," though, which is what threw me off.

Eldariel
2009-03-02, 01:17 PM
I remember this trick, which is definitely finite. You said "infinite," though, which is what threw me off.

Yes, my bad on that; it's only "a sufficiently large number". A trick actually exists for infinite spells (it involves Absorbtion-spell and metamagic reducers), but it's most applicable for a Nova Sorcerer (at which point you're effectively infinitely powerful as you don't run out of spell slots nor actions and thus can cast as many spells in one turn as you want; I recall they're level 4 or lower); any Incantatrix can pull it off rather easily though, but you won't have the actions to make the most out of it without the Arcane Fusion+Arcane Spellsurge trickery.

Deepblue706
2009-03-02, 03:03 PM
At level 1, the Wizard has 2 Color Sprays (save or lose for the whole encounter), and perhaps 3 or 4 if he has Int 20 and/or is specialized. The Druid has Entangle, multiple times. The Cleric has Command multiple times, and a CLW wand via gold pooling. The Artificer has a Bane: Whatever you're fighting crossbow, which does 1d8 + 2d6+2 (average 13.5 damage) and is therefore a save or die, vs AC. Not hard at all. Probably easier than a typical party.

This is a late reply; but stay with me, I was away a while.

Color Spray does have potential to end encounters, but the close range and the fact that every target gets a save means there's a fair chance even weak-willed enemies will make their saves, and the Wizard is in dangerous territory. I'd say this can be risky for most Wizards, unless they can afford very high DEX and CON. The need may be alleviated if they have dependable teammates who understand efficient ways to distract or disable an enemy.

Entangle is a great spell, but it unfortunately doesn't move once you cast it. If your enemies aren't bundled-up, it loses some of that greatness.

Command is another great choice, but it's a close-range, single-target spell which, while capable of granting significant advantages, doesn't necessarily end an encounter.

Artificer is badass.

Individually, each of these abilities are really, really strong; but my commentary was not based on how much hurt these guys can lay down, despite killing your enemy before he can hurt you being the absolute best defense. But rather, the Druid and Wizard are going to have to find creative ways to improve their own AC so that they don't get owned by missile weapons, as will a Cleric if he wants to avoid heavy armor. If I'm not mistaken, Artificers aren't too durable, either.

This group is highly effective, but I think they each, individually become signficantly more hindered when losing initiative than say, a Fighter; a weaker but, at this level, more reliable class. If other characters are down, he might not be able to do much to get them back on their feet; but the fact he can't be hurt so easily means the enemy should fear him, if he presents enough of a threat.

Eldariel
2009-03-02, 03:13 PM
Bleh, if you're really worried, you can walk around with a Tower Shield in total cover; non-proficiency doesn't matter if you aren't attacking or using skills, and you can just drop it when it's time to cast. Also, Druid's AC really helps with the tanking.

And the Wizard should definitely specialise in such a versatile casting party; that puts you up to 3 spells per level and you can go up to 5 with Focused Specialist and 20 Int. I'd definitely expect no fewer than 3, and probably at least 4. That allows you to prepare a mix of Sleep & Color Spray. Maybe even a Grease.

Deepblue706
2009-03-02, 03:27 PM
Bleh, if you're really worried, you can walk around with a Tower Shield in total cover; non-proficiency doesn't matter if you aren't attacking or using skills, and you can just drop it when it's time to cast. Also, Druid's AC really helps with the tanking.

And the Wizard should definitely specialise in such a versatile casting party; that puts you up to 3 spells per level and you can go up to 5 with Focused Specialist and 20 Int. I'd definitely expect no fewer than 3, and probably at least 4. That allows you to prepare a mix of Sleep & Color Spray. Maybe even a Grease.

Actually, Animal Companion is a really good point. A Riding Dog is about as effective as a poorly-made Fighter, which at low levels is still highly valuable for HP and a decent attack.

I had forgotten the Tower Shield was purely wooden; so that is another decent way to protect the Druid from missile attacks. However, a lack of proficiency will render him vulnerable to teams of melee and ranged enemies.

As far as the Wizard goes; I'm afraid I don't follow how you have 20 INT. I don't have a great deal of knowledge regarding non-standard races, and I was under the impression we were talking about from level 1-up. The only race that comes to mind at the moment is Gray-Elf, which has a CON penalty (and I wouldn't suggest playing unless you had very good rolls or had a very-high point-buy so that the penalty doesn't matter anyway). Or, an Old-Aged Human. :smalleek:

Eldariel
2009-03-02, 03:52 PM
Gray, Fire & Sun Elves are all fine races; with your racial bonus to Dex & Int, you can generally afford to make up for the Dex penalty (and the Str/Cha penalty is rather inconsequential). 32pb gets you 6/16/14/20/8/8 array. 28pb admittedly probably sees 6/16/12/20/8/8 on low levels, so meh, and 25pb is mere 6/16/12/19/8/8.

Other Int-bonus races include:
Lesser Tiefling
Lesser Air Genasi
Lesser Fire Genasi
Deep Imaskari
off the top of my head.

Also, any of the Elves could be Dragonborn of Bahamut, negating the Con-penalty (and Dex-bonus) and picking up the Mind-aspect for all sorts of useful abilities.

Oh, and Spellcasting Prodigy with 18 also mimics the 20 and so on.

Deepblue706
2009-03-02, 07:02 PM
Gray, Fire & Sun Elves are all fine races; with your racial bonus to Dex & Int, you can generally afford to make up for the Dex penalty (and the Str/Cha penalty is rather inconsequential). 32pb gets you 6/16/14/20/8/8 array. 28pb admittedly probably sees 6/16/12/20/8/8 on low levels, so meh, and 25pb is mere 6/16/12/19/8/8.

Not bad.



Other Int-bonus races include:
Lesser Tiefling
Lesser Air Genasi
Lesser Fire Genasi
Deep Imaskari
off the top of my head.


Forgot about Lesser Planetouched; honestly, I never liked the flavor and I've always instinctively avoided thinking about them. No idea what an Imaskari is, though.



Also, any of the Elves could be Dragonborn of Bahamut, negating the Con-penalty (and Dex-bonus) and picking up the Mind-aspect for all sorts of useful abilities.

Unfamiliar.



Oh, and Spellcasting Prodigy with 18 also mimics the 20 and so on.

I suppose that works if you get access to Faerun material...

AgentPaper
2009-03-02, 09:15 PM
Can you see through stone? Nope? Too bad. You can see it if you pass through the door, but by now it's already triggered on you. In fact, it'd be pretty easy to see and defeat from the other side of the door, seeing as symbols have to be in plain sight to do any good, and a sheet 100% negates them. That of course, is why they are used in such a way so as to not waste 5k. Get death immunity or die.

Also, optimized campaigns don't need suboptimal levels.

Ignoring your straw man.

I never said you would see through the stone, don't put words in my mouth. And as I said, I don't know how you would spot this particular trap, but the point is that it's a trap, designed to set off with X trigger, and you're looking for traps, and roll high enough to spot the trap and not set it off. How exactly you do all this isn't important. Fact is, if you put in a trap somewhere, you can find it with a search check. If you say, "It's too well hidden, no search check!" then congratulations, rocks fall everyone dies.

And thank you for ignoring my argument and calling me a strawman. That really makes me want to take anything you say seriously.

Eldariel
2009-03-03, 04:55 AM
Unfamiliar.

Deep Imaskari in "Underdark"-supplement. +2 Int, -2 Dex and this wonderful ability called "Spell Clutch", which allows them to re-prepare one of the 1st level slots they've prepared and cast that day. Making 'em effectively able to have 6 slots for the first level as 20 Int Focused Specialists.

Dragonborn of Bahamut are in Races of the Dragon; basically, any creature can be reborn through "Rites of Rebirth" with the Dragonborn template. It effectively does this:
-2 Dex, +2 Con

Lose all racial abilities such as skill bonuses, proficiencies, darkvision, low-light vision, bonus feats, etc. (maintain stat adjustments & movement speeds) and gain one of the three draconic aspects offered to a Dragonborn: Mind, Heart or Wings. Wings is obvious, Heart gives a breath weapon and Mind gives draconic senses (by far the best for a Wizard as they can acquire Wings & Breath Weapon on their own right from a different source). As a note, the aspect's bonuses increase as you rise in level. For example, level 1 Dragonborn can't fly with the wings yet; he can only do boosted jumps. Breath Weapon obviously increases in potency & so do the senses.

Roderick_BR
2009-03-03, 08:56 AM
Is it a testament of the Beguiler's power that it gets some mentions in a thread about an OPTIMIZED party?
It's a testament to his usefulness. He pretty much clobbered the bard in the head and took his place, while pickpocketing the thief's skill and trap abilities, granting him an often-sure place in many gaming groups.

Curmudgeon
2009-03-03, 11:13 AM
Flesh to Stone trap at level 6:

Rogue makes checks, doesn't get anywhere close to 30.
Nonsense. The Rogue gets a minimum of 30 on this check (i.e., when taking 10), and always finds this DC trap without effort. Since the Rogue has trap sense as well as trapfinding, (s)he gets "an intuitive sense that alerts her to danger from traps" and automatically makes such Search checks without having to think about doing so.

10 ("take 10")
+9 (ranks)
+2 (INT 14)
+5 competence (Goggles of Minute Seeing)
+2 circumstance (masterwork trapfinding tool)
+2 racial (Elf)
---
30

Edit: Again, Rogues have no place in an optimized group. Stop it. Artificers and Beguilers do not have trap sense. They've got to explicitly go about making Search checks to find traps that the Rogue makes automatically. The Elven Rogue also automatically makes checks to find secret or concealed doors. And with more skill points, the Rogue doesn't have to scrimp on skills and is just better at this sort of thing.

Additionally, the Elven Rogue has the ability and the time (4 extra hours daily not spent sleeping, plus 1 waiting for spellcaster preparation) to go about increasing their personal wealth. Wealth by Level is an average for characters. No self-respecting Rogue should ever be close to this average. They get their fair share of the party's acquisitions, and still have plenty of solo earning power. More money = better equipment = better capabilities = greater value to the party.

Eldariel
2009-03-03, 11:37 AM
Artificers and Beguilers do not have trap sense. They've got to explicitly go about making Search checks to find traps that the Rogue makes automatically. The Elven Rogue also automatically makes checks to find secret or concealed doors. And with more skill points, the Rogue doesn't have to scrimp on skills and is just better at this sort of thing.

I don't think Trap Sense does what you think it does. Trap Sense (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/rogue.htm#trapSense) grants you +1 bonus to Reflex & AC vs. traps. It does not make Search-checks automatically; all it does is make a triggered trap hurt you less. It's very explicit about its benefits and "making Search-checks automatically" is not one of them. In fact, automatic trapfinding is an epic feat (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/feats.htm#epicTrapfinding) (no, it shouldn't be, but it is). As far as trapfinding goes, Beguiler & Artificer have exact same abilities, except better average check result due to having their primary stat for trapfinding.


Additionally, the Elven Rogue has the ability and the time (4 extra hours daily not spent sleeping, plus 1 waiting for spellcaster preparation) to go about increasing their personal wealth. Wealth by Level is an average for characters. No self-respecting Rogue should ever be close to this average. They get their fair share of the party's acquisitions, and still have plenty of solo earning power. More money = better equipment = better capabilities = greater value to the party.

Huh? When you're adventuring, chances are you aren't near any cities and there isn't much worth stealing. When you're not adventuring, everyone can be making "extra money" in the same way; casters can use spells where Rogue uses skills. Oh, and protecting your belongings against Teleport seems a wee bit harder (requires constant spells in effect) than protecting them against a burglar, albeit a skilled one.

And really, doing that seems like an epicly bad idea; eventually you'll get caught as you break into a place that was harder than it looked/some guards were nearby/you just had bad luck and at that point, you're in deep **** and depending on how close your ties are with the party, chances are the entire party might be.

Not to mention, if you're of any good or lawful alignment, chances are you won't be doing that (chaotic good might in some circumstances, but sure as hell not as a rule).

Curmudgeon
2009-03-03, 12:30 PM
I don't think Trap Sense does what you think it does. Trap Sense (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/rogue.htm#trapSense) grants you +1 bonus to Reflex & AC vs. traps. It does not make Search-checks automatically Opinions differ. From Simple Q&A (By RAW) V (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4046459):
A. 577


Q. 577
Are characters with the Trap Sense feat entitled to search for the trigger to a trap before they activate it, or are the just allowed to? (Assume Search DC is 21ish)They get an automatic search check without having to actively be looking for traps. You should note that the Rogue trap sense ability description is different than for other classes:
At 3rd level, a rogue gains an intuitive sense that alerts her to danger from traps, giving her a +1 bonus on Reflex saves made to avoid traps and a +1 dodge bonus to AC against attacks made by traps.
Starting at 3rd level, a barbarian gains a +1 bonus on Reflex saves made to avoid traps and a +1 dodge bonus to AC against attacks made by traps. I think the extra text has meaning, and the only reasonable game mechanic interpretation for "an intuitive sense" is automatic Search checks to find traps, similar to an Elf's automatic Search checks to find secret doors.

Draz74
2009-03-03, 12:35 PM
The punctuation of the Rogue ability makes it pretty clear that the bonus to AC and Reflex saves is the manifestation of the "intuitive sense." Thus, the Rogue's Trap Sense is mechanically identical to the Barbarian's.

Why write it any differently, then? Flavor.

But wait, isn't it sloppy editing to have two identical abilities and word them differently, even for flavor? Sure, according to modern gamer standards, but Core is full of stuff like that.

Eldariel
2009-03-03, 12:37 PM
Explain then, why Epic Trapfinding exists if the function is automatically available for Rogues anyways, and Rogue is the only class that can qualify for the feat within SRD rules in the first place?

As a note, the difference doesn't exist in PHB; both Barbarian & Rogue have the exact same ability. That's probably an error in SRD as no errata exists to remove that portition from Barbarian's ability. Seems strictly fluff to me.

I'd wager Silvanos is wrong on this account.

monty
2009-03-03, 12:48 PM
Opinions differ. From Simple Q&A (By RAW) V (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4046459):

While I admit that Silvanos is very knowledgeable, he is not perfect, and I believe he is incorrect in this case. Not only is there no explicit rule allowing free Search checks for rogues, the wording of the ability clearly implies that that's not what it means anyway.

Edit: Ninja'ed. That's what I get for replying to multiple posts at once.

Curmudgeon
2009-03-03, 02:32 PM
Explain then, why Epic Trapfinding exists if the function is automatically available for Rogues anyways, and Rogue is the only class that can qualify for the feat within SRD rules in the first place? Ah, thank you! You've found the explicit statement of how Trap Sense gives automatic Search checks. You see, Epic Trapfinding is actually a 3.0 feat named Trap Sense (Epic Level Handbook page 68). In 3.0 the Rogue didn't have Trap Sense as a class ability. The only update the feat got in the "FREE D&D® V.3.5 ACCESSORY UPDATE: Epic Level Handbook" is the name:
Two epic feats have received name changes. Beast Companion is now called Magical Beast Companion (see below), and Trap Sense is now called Epic Trapfinding. Interestingly, the official online feat index (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/feats) still shows this as Trap Sense. It's redundant for Rogues, of course, but exists now for classes like the Beguiler who can eventually attain the same capability Rogues get at 3rd level.

As a note, the difference doesn't exist in PHB; both Barbarian & Rogue have the exact same ability. Then both classes with Trap Sense should get automatic Search checks for traps. Without Trapfinding the Barbarian is limited to traps with DCs of 20 or lower, of course.

monty
2009-03-03, 02:44 PM
Ah, thank you! You've found the explicit statement of how Trap Sense gives automatic Search checks. You see, Epic Trapfinding is actually a 3.0 feat named Trap Sense (Epic Level Handbook page 68). In 3.0 the Rogue didn't have Trap Sense as a class ability. The only update the feat got in the "FREE D&D® V.3.5 ACCESSORY UPDATE: Epic Level Handbook" is the name:

Interestingly, the official online feat index (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/feats) still shows this as Trap Sense. It's redundant for Rogues, of course, but exists now for classes like the Beguiler who can eventually attain the same capability Rogues get at 3rd level.

Just because it has the same name doesn't mean that it's the same ability.

Let's make this simple. Where in the description of the rogue ability does it say that they get automatic Search checks? If it's not there, then by RAW it doesn't exist. Anyway, let's look at the syntax again:

At 3rd level, a rogue gains an intuitive sense that alerts her to danger from traps, giving her a +1 bonus on Reflex saves made to avoid traps and a +1 dodge bonus to AC against attacks made by traps.
Notice that it lists the fluff (intuitive sense), and immediately follows it with the mechanical bonuses. This pretty much explicitly spells out what it means: the intuitive sense isn't a Geiger counter telling you there's a trap nearby; it's just a feeling that gives you a split-second warning that something bad's about to happen so you can jump out of the way or whatever.

Eldariel
2009-03-03, 03:40 PM
Ah, thank you! You've found the explicit statement of how Trap Sense gives automatic Search checks. You see, Epic Trapfinding is actually a 3.0 feat named Trap Sense (Epic Level Handbook page 68). In 3.0 the Rogue didn't have Trap Sense as a class ability. The only update the feat got in the "FREE D&D® V.3.5 ACCESSORY UPDATE: Epic Level Handbook" is the name: Interestingly, the official online feat index (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/feats) still shows this as Trap Sense. It's redundant for Rogues, of course, but exists now for classes like the Beguiler who can eventually attain the same capability Rogues get at 3rd level.

That's only a consequence of Uncanny Dodge simplification. In 3.0, Trap Sense was a part of Uncanny Dodge and thus not separately spelled out (but it was there). In 3.5, Uncanny Dodge was split into three separate abilities, and they named that part of UD Trap Sense (and the Flanking-part Improved Uncanny Dodge), probably because it was the most descriptional name. That necessitied the change of the name "Trap Sense" as an afterthought so it simply became "Epic Trapfinding".

In SRD-rules, Rogue is the only class with Trapfinding, and yet Epic Trapfinding is included along too. I wonder why...?