PDA

View Full Version : Are paladins overpowered?



darkblust
2009-06-07, 02:40 PM
Are paladins overpowered in your opinion?With their uber powerfull pet and what...I play a beguiler,and it seems as if my friends paladin is 10 x more powerful then me,or even the druid.:smallfrown:.Is this likely,or is it just whats on paper?By the way,he is about the opposite of a min/maxer.He is paladin 6/rogue 1.we are all level 6.Or is it beacause he is a melee person,and we are spellcasters?

lsfreak
2009-06-07, 02:44 PM
Uh... no.

It's probably due to the way you play, or how you define "powerful." If you mean do straight damage, than he's going to be more powerful than your beguiler - but your beguiler is more powerful is you actually take into consideration what you can do ("Hey! You! Fight for me!" You did no damage but won the ecnounter.)

Similarly with the druid; if he's not making a lot of his wildshape ability or his animal companion, the paladin will do more damage. The druid can easily outpace the paladin, however, by making use of these two features.

Paladins have problem in that they need all but Intelligence to be a high score, his power will taper off. It's also level 5-ish that a well-played caster starts really outclassing melee in terms of power.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-07, 02:47 PM
Sounds like something weird is going on. Paladin mounts are very, very weak. They get decent if you get Leadership and combine you cohort and mount (although the special mount quality increases LA, IIRC; it's in the DMG on cohorts).

Paladins suck, overall. It's a 4 or 5 -level class you take, maybe with 1-2 levels of Fighter, before you go into a prestige class (Cavalier, Pious Templar, or something else, according to taste). They can be decent, but will be outperformed by fighters.

I can tell you're new to the forums, so I'll be gentle: spellcasters snap the melee classes in two over their knee without breaking a sweat and laugh about it. Beguilers aren't the most powerful ones, but they're a save-or-suck focused class (enchantments and illusions). How the druid isn't a hundred times better than the paladin, I can't even guess, because the animal companion is about two, three times as effective as the special mount (aren't bears available at 6th level?). Druids are better than any other class even without being optimized.

It sounds to me like there's something weird going on, though. How is the paladin so powerful? What kind of mount does he have, how many HD, etc.? Did the paladin start out as a rogue, or is that his latest level, and did he take paladin levels after taking the rogue level? (You can't continue taking paladin levels after you multiclass, unless it's a prestige class that specifically allows you, or you're playing in Faerűn and multiclassing into something your deity specifically allows for paladins.)


In short, "no, paladins suck," "spellcasters are always better and druids are the best," and "someone's cheating or abusing the rules."

Edit:

Paladins have problem in that they need all but Intelligence to be a high score, his power will taper off. It's also level 5-ish that a well-played caster starts really outclassing melee in terms of power.

Actually, they don't need that much Dex (12 will work until they get mithral full plate, when they need 16; although that's optional, really), but they do need Int to make use of those class skills - they've got a much bigger and better selection than fighters, but the same amount of skill points.

Korivan
2009-06-07, 03:00 PM
power is how the character is played, not just the class abilities. heck, i dont even think druids are overpowered. a fighter properly thought out could kick serious patooty, at least in our games they do.

Waspinator
2009-06-07, 03:05 PM
What information could you give us on what spells, gear, feats, etc everyone in your party is using? That would help answer your questions. Though, of course a Paladin is doing more damage than a Beguiler. Beguilers don't do damage; they cripple people so that others can do the damage.

Mando Knight
2009-06-07, 03:06 PM
power is how the character is played, not just the class abilities. heck, i dont even think druids are overpowered. a fighter properly thought out could kick serious patooty, at least in our games they do.

And a Druid can transform into a bear and go Godless Killing Machine on you. While casting spells.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-07, 03:41 PM
And a Druid can transform into a bear and go Godless Killing Machine on you. While casting spells.

Yeah. My experience is, without exception, that druids outdo 2-3 other party members in effectiveness, without any real difference in tactics and without actual optimization (just the Natural Spell feat).

Piedmon_Sama
2009-06-07, 03:42 PM
Unless he's been harried all day by enemies, in which case he'll be out his best abilities. A fighter or a rogue can chug some healing potions and be good as new, while casters basically get one or two fights to shine a day.

Seriously, I can't be the only DM who will have enemies fight intelligently and attempt to exhaust the players, and pursue them instead of patiently waiting in Dungeon Chamber #1168 to die, right?

Learnedguy
2009-06-07, 03:49 PM
And a Druid can transform into a bear and go Godless Killing Machine on you. While casting spells.

I think he meant power in a more philosophical way. Its not about how hard you hit, but where.

The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world, regardless of class.

In contrast to popular belief, lateral thinking is not a wizard class feature.

EagleWiz
2009-06-07, 03:59 PM
What is all this stuff about druids being the most powerfull class? Batman kills druidzilla.

Flickerdart
2009-06-07, 04:02 PM
What is all this stuff about druids being the most powerfull class? Batman kills druidzilla.
Not at those low levels, when the Druid is three Fighters and a caster, and the Wizard can't stand next to combat without popping an artery.

Doc Roc
2009-06-07, 04:02 PM
Paladins have some superb builds, but are not by default a very strong class. In fact, they are fairly poorly rated, though the have a good degree of optimization potential.

Piedmon_Sama
2009-06-07, 04:04 PM
Yeah, I'm gonna be gone for the rest of today so I'll post this now while it's still appropos:

I've never bought into the "Casters Rule All" way of thinking. Maybe at higher levels.... but then, it's generally accepted that at high levels the rules and the whole CR system become hopelessly broken anyway. In the level-range I think of as the "meat" of a campaign (e.g where most people will be playing), a Caster can buff himself or shoot out Save-or-Sucks and be hell and Jesus on the battlefield for one or two fights a day. And if he runs into trouble after that, he's no better than a mediocre warrior (Druid, Wizard) or just totally helpless (Wizard/Sorcerer).

OTOH, a Rogue/Fighter or Rogue/Barbarian (or maybe even Rogue/Knight? Never tried that one) has the health to fight lesser enemies all day without getting overwhelmed, and the skills to creep off or MacGuyver a solution when just plowing away isn't the answer. Casters only dominate when the party deigns to move at the pace of its slowest member and stick to 1-2 fights a day. Hell, the DM's Guide tells you to do let them do this, but it's crap. No intelligent monster should sit on its ass and politely wait for the PCs to knock on the door. If they live in a dungeon, then the anterior chambers should have some method--a scroll of message, a bell, carrier lizards, anything--of alerting the interior chambers, whereupon the monsters further in ought to be banging on the PCs' door.

This is difficult to talk about because it involves a number of hypotheticals, and is different depending on the circumstances of every battle. But I've never felt like the casters were in danger of overshadowing the mundane members of any party I've run: quite the reverse, usually they tend to fall behind and rely on the Fighter/Barbarian/Knight to keep them out of trouble once they've Wild Shaped/Fireballed as much as they can.

Decoy Lockbox
2009-06-07, 04:10 PM
Paladins in 3e, while cool, are pretty bad. I think the best I ever did as a paladin was a smite evil + two handed lance + power attack + spirited charge guy named "Sir Lancedemere".

Paladin goodness by edition:
1e -- Fantastic (permanent protection from evil for you and all allies within 5')
2e -- Okay (like 1e paladin, but without certain awesome features)
3e -- Crap (as discussed above)
4e -- Alright (marking ability is weak, but class is solid)

Yora
2009-06-07, 04:12 PM
Unless he's been harried all day by enemies, in which case he'll be out his best abilities. A fighter or a rogue can chug some healing potions and be good as new, while casters basically get one or two fights to shine a day.

Seriously, I can't be the only DM who will have enemies fight intelligently and attempt to exhaust the players, and pursue them instead of patiently waiting in Dungeon Chamber #1168 to die, right?
No, there are at least two in existance. :smallbiggrin:

Mordokai
2009-06-07, 04:33 PM
4e -- Alright (marking ability is weak, but class is solid)

I'm not sure what you mean by that. In my experience, paladins have one of the best marking abilities out there. Granted, I didn't pay much attention to other classes(in the way, I didn't play them), but as far as I saw from what my buddies played, paladins are the best at marking enemies.

As for the rest... mechanically looking, paladins are one of the weakest classes out there. That doesn't mean you can't enjoy playing them. I do. In fact, they are my favourite class. But I really fail to see how a paladin can be the most powerful party member. Either you're playing really wrong(no offense meant), or you're having some heavy house ruling.

tyckspoon
2009-06-07, 04:36 PM
OTOH, a Rogue/Fighter or Rogue/Barbarian (or maybe even Rogue/Knight? Never tried that one) has the health to fight lesser enemies all day without getting overwhelmed, and the skills to creep off or MacGuyver a solution when just plowing away isn't the answer.


More accurately, they have the health to fight through one reasonably challenging fight. Maybe two. Then, if they're lucky, the DM allows cheap healing items and they can keep themselves going. If they're not, they have to refer to their local friendly spellcaster to get their HPs back, which puts the whole thing back on relying on the caster's "limited" resources.

And a caster who blows all his best spells on just one or two fights is either alone, doing all the heavy lifting for a severely underpowered party, or just flat out doing it wrong. Most of the four-five spell Certain Win combos people invent are either created as answers to "But can a solo wizard handle THIS?!?" challenge or for PvP scenarios. If the wizard's party is anywhere near functional, he can usually get away with just using one or two spells each fight and letting the rest of the group take over from there (and they don't necessarily have to be his highest levels, either- spells like Web and Glitterdust remain useful pretty much forever.) Doing it wrong is when the caster feels like he has to cast his highest available spell slot in every round of every combat; that's just a blatant waste of power.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-07, 04:41 PM
Druids, specifically, don't have to blow their spells at all. Many of their buffs last for most of the day, and they mostly fight by ganging up on enemies in melee, throwing a well-chosen spell or two per fight.

Dagren
2009-06-07, 04:43 PM
More accurately, they have the health to fight through one reasonably challenging fight. Maybe two. Then, if they're lucky, the DM allows cheap healing items and they can keep themselves going. If they're not, they have to refer to their local friendly spellcaster to get their HPs back, which puts the whole thing back on relying on the caster's "limited" resources.

And a caster who blows all his best spells on just one or two fights is either alone, doing all the heavy lifting for a severely underpowered party, or just flat out doing it wrong. Most of the four-five spell Certain Win combos people invent are either created as answers to "But can a solo wizard handle THIS?!?" challenge or for PvP scenarios. If the wizard's party is anywhere near functional, he can usually get away with just using one or two spells each fight and letting the rest of the group take over from there (and they don't necessarily have to be his highest levels, either- spells like Web and Glitterdust remain useful pretty much forever.) Doing it wrong is when the caster feels like he has to cast his highest available spell slot in every round of every combat; that's just a blatant waste of power.How about wands? Don't they greatly extend the caster's power? I figure if the fighter is allowed healing potions to help with longevity, the caster should have some items too. Or are wands a lot more expensive? I can't remember.

T.G. Oskar
2009-06-07, 04:57 PM
Since the paladin we're speaking of is the 3.5 edition (as it's the only one with a special Pokémount, I should speak a few things.

First, the Paladin is one of the few classes that, much like the Druid, has nifty class features that weren't included in their class (Druids ALWAYS get Natural Spell, while Paladin players whine to DMs to get them Holy Avengers). The Holy Avenger is an awesome weapon, but it's something that roleplaying tends to nuke down. It's one of the very few things that promote at least getting some more Paladin levels (if only for free targeted Greater Dispel Magic).

Second, the mount. Go into a dungeon, and the mount has to stay. That's practically half of the class features of the Paladin out, while the Druid can still hang out with his Dire Bear pal all day. Furthermore, it pretty much forces you to take Mounted Combat and Ride-by Attack to make effective use of the mount's abilities. There's at least one spell in the Player's Handbook and about 10 more spells in between Spell Compendium and Complete Champion that are devoted exclusively to your special mount. That's reduction of possible abilities, not granting you abilities.

Though, you can change your special mount into something else. And that's something I love; you don't have to be tied to your Pokémount. Charging Smite is one of the favored ones (since it is completely effective at the moment you take it), but it's not always the flavor you seek. Funny enough, Complete Champion and Dungeonscape have some of the better alternate class features, but apparently exchanged (Underdark Warrior and Divine Spirit, respectively). The CC class feature is excellent in dungeons, while the DScape class feature is mostly an ability for a divine champion (gee whiz!)

Third, too frontloaded and nothing for later. Your only bonuses for raising Paladin levels are to get new spells (which are mostly self-buffs and some unique abilities, very rarely damage spells), better Lay on Hands (which gets exhausted pretty quickly), and more damage on Smite Evil. Each of the three can be enhanced with the aid of certain prestige classes, but you have to decide which one to enter. It practically begs you to get into a Prestige Class after level 4, some at level 5.

Fourth, the spells. Some of the Cleric spells would benefit the Paladin so greatly, but they were blatantly made Cleric-only. Read just the PHB and realize the truth, read Spell Compendium or any of the post-SpC books and weep as how the developers nerf Paladin spellcasting. Heck, half caster level sucks major pelotas.

Fifth, no matter how much optimization you do (ubercharger, getting Holy Avenger/Valorous Lance/Mithral Full Plate, dipping Cleric, Fist of Raziel, Sword of Arcane Order, etc. etc. etc), the Cleric beats you. No, really. In core only, Divine Power allows the Cleric to step on the Paladin's footsteps and wipe him out. Add Righteous Might, and only the most optimized fighter begins to weep. A Paladin, regardless of optimization, is no better than a smart Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Psion or Artificer.

And finally, the Code. No one gets it. DMs tend to misinterpret it. Pretty much the only reason why the Code exists is for roleplaying terms, and it causes more trouble than it should. It's nice to bind the actions of the character so it doesn't become just another murderous looter adventurer, so that it means something else. But most of the time, a good roleplayer will find it a nuisance.

In a nutshell: Paladins don't necessarily suck, but they can't reach the toes of the big guys no matter how much they try. You have to pretty much PrC your way into the big leagues, and even the Fighters will set you aside. Unless you turn into Ubercharger, somehow get as much AC and saves as possible, turn into a Ret-Paladin or something, you won't be as much of a challenge as a well-trained Fighter, and a laugh at a G-5 Top Tier member.

woodenbandman
2009-06-07, 05:58 PM
Absolutely everyone in this thread got trolled, incidentally.

Flickerdart
2009-06-07, 06:04 PM
Absolutely everyone in this thread got trolled, incidentally.
We are doing this for the sake of the newbies. Even if the question was insincere, we shall lead all who read it back to the path of light. For such is the duty of a Fighter Without Bonus Feats! :miko:

T.G. Oskar
2009-06-07, 06:54 PM
We are doing this for the sake of the newbies. Even if the question was insincere, we shall lead all who read it back to the path of light. For such is the duty of a Fighter Without Bonus Feats!

Quoting for Great Justice! ...Erm, you don't mind if I alter a bit what you say to make it more relevant?

Still, any question deserves an answer. It probably fumed a few, but it also provided a calm and logical set of answers. It's not easy to play a Paladin, much less in a campaign where the goal is to acquire power and be the ultimate, god-like being over all. Or at a mostly mechanical campaign.

We are accepting this troll, or apparent troll, or thinly-veiled insult, or even unintended and misinterpreted comment. We don't want new players to have a bad idea of a Paladin, right? Nor do we want to promote the bad ways to play a Paladin, no sir.

That doesn't mean we aren't going to solve it with humor. Like the Giant, for example.

Flickerdart
2009-06-07, 06:56 PM
You can take out the square brackets, it's close enough, I don't mind.

I'm honoured, too.:smallbiggrin:

ZeroNumerous
2009-06-07, 08:34 PM
And if he runs into trouble after that, he's no better than a mediocre warrior (Druid, Wizard) or just totally helpless (Wizard/Sorcerer).

I assume you meant (Druid, Cleric) instead of mentioning Wizard twice, so I'll address both at the same time.

Druid/Cleric: All Day Buffs.

Done.

To clarify: Clerics can simply DMM: Persist everything they buff with. Bam. Negated that whole "I run out of gas" problem with two feats and an entry feat. Clerics are walking, talking beatdowns when they DMM Persist. Even without DMM Persist clerics can walk around with Greater Magic Weapon, Magic Vestment and buff up with Divine Power to be equal to a fighter.

Druids at level 8 can Wild Shape 8 hours a day, 3 times a day. And unless you never ever allow them to sleep this will be all through the adventuring day. Past level 8, a druid runs out of steam as quickly as a fighter since he just bear-forms and wanders around mauling crap. Further, his wild shape replaces his STR and DEX scores. So the only thing the druid cares about is his CON and WIS, making him just as SAD as the Wizard.

A fighter? Rogue? Knight? Any melee class not from ToB? Cleric/Druid replaces them. Druid does so with his class features alone. You can claim otherwise, but railing against it won't change it. Does it suck? Oh ya. But Wizards gave us ToB to fix that. And it did, sort of.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-06-07, 08:37 PM
Druids at level 8 can Wild Shape 8 hours a day, 3 times a day. And unless you never ever allow them to sleep this will be all through the adventuring day. Past level 8, a druid runs out of steam as quickly as a fighter since he just bear-forms and wanders around mauling crap. Further, his wild shape replaces his STR and DEX scores. So the only thing the druid cares about is his CON and WIS, making him just as SAD as the Wizard.

Technically Dual Attribute Dependant.

Belobog
2009-06-07, 09:03 PM
Technically Dual Attribute Dependant.

Theorethically, the Druid doesn't really need Con; instead of engaging enemies as a bear, he could take to the skies as a starling and throw down some lightning bolts or something (although, probably not at level five). So, while it would impact him, it's not as necessarily to him as a fighter; a druid could still work with an high Wisdom and nothing but 8s everywhere else. Just means that you should expect the natural result when a dragon steps on his head.

Decoy Lockbox
2009-06-07, 09:57 PM
I'm not sure what you mean by that. In my experience, paladins have one of the best marking abilities out there. Granted, I didn't pay much attention to other classes(in the way, I didn't play them), but as far as I saw from what my buddies played, paladins are the best at marking enemies.

As for the rest... mechanically looking, paladins are one of the weakest classes out there. That doesn't mean you can't enjoy playing them. I do. In fact, they are my favourite class. But I really fail to see how a paladin can be the most powerful party member. Either you're playing really wrong(no offense meant), or you're having some heavy house ruling.

So far the only 4e characters I've played have been a paladin and a fighter. The fighter does more damage, and his mark doesn't have crazy stipulations about who you can put it on. Anybody who he makes an attack roll against gets marked, period. So he can mark multiple people using close bursts (of which the fighter class gets many) or multiclass stuff like thunderwave or swordburst. The paladin can pretty much only mark one guy, ever. Lets compare mark damages as well, using the damage that my fighter and my paladin could deal as level 9 characters (the level of my paladin, fighter got retired at lvl 12 in another campaign):

paladin: 5 radiant damage (15 CHA)
Fighter: 1d8+8 (avg 12.5)

Fighter's chance to hit average monsters was about 75% too. And this fighter's damage was really bad for his level too, since he was doing longsword 'n' shield, and existed before Iron Armbands came out. Imagine a 20 str fighter with a +2 reckless fullblade and lvl 6 armbands, his mark would do 1d12+13 on a hit, avg 19.5 -- compare that to the dinky 5 radiant damage my paladin deals.

Our group did a playtest game at lvl 28 as well -- I made a fullblade fighter whose basic attack did something like 2d12+45 (avg 58). A paladin at that level with maxed out CHA would do something like 16 radiant damage. Can you see how that 16 damage might not be all that scary for the monster on the receiving end?

On the CO boards, the paladin is commonly held to be the worst defender in 4e, and I completely support that opinion. My DM is even houseruling my mark to do 3+cha+str damage (which would be 10) to make my paladin more menacing. So again, not a bad class, just not great.

ericgrau
2009-06-07, 10:07 PM
Are paladins overpowered in your opinion?With their uber powerfull pet and what...I play a beguiler,and it seems as if my friends paladin is 10 x more powerful then me,or even the druid.:smallfrown:.Is this likely,or is it just whats on paper?By the way,he is about the opposite of a min/maxer.He is paladin 6/rogue 1.we are all level 6.Or is it beacause he is a melee person,and we are spellcasters?

It is common in inexperienced groups for all martial classes to outdo casters, even when both the caster and martial guy are inexperienced. Especially at lower levels. Just read through your spell descriptions and do some more planning or take advantage of the tips I'm sure you'll get from people here and things should turn around. Leveling up a couple times or so may help too. Just don't be tempted by the power of the dark side, i.e. builds using 3-4 different books in combinations that don't make sense without metagaming :smallwink:.

Flickerdart
2009-06-07, 10:11 PM
It is common in inexperienced groups for all martial classes to outdo casters, even when both the caster and martial guy are inexperienced. Just read through your spell list and do some more planning or take advantage of the tips I'm sure you'll get from people here and things should turn around. Just don't be tempted by the power of the dark side, i.e. builds using 3-4 different books in combinations that don't make sense without metagaming :smallwink:.
Outside PHBII (where the class is, of course), SpC (for Advanced Learning) and Complete Mage (Unsettling Enchantment), Beguilers get little from splats. Complete Adventurer could be nice for Conceal Spellcasting, but that's about it.

Not like they need cheesing either, they're a full casting Rogue.

Worira
2009-06-07, 10:37 PM
Unless he's been harried all day by enemies, in which case he'll be out his best abilities. A fighter or a rogue can chug some healing potions and be good as new, while casters basically get one or two fights to shine a day.

Seriously, I can't be the only DM who will have enemies fight intelligently and attempt to exhaust the players, and pursue them instead of patiently waiting in Dungeon Chamber #1168 to die, right?

Giant bears, yo.

Mando Knight
2009-06-07, 11:55 PM
Giant bears, yo.

For emphasis... *Adopts a Colbert face*

BEARS (http://www.wikiality.com/Bears).

Kris Strife
2009-06-08, 05:37 AM
For what its worth, my first DM had an old Level 50 full caster PC. 10 levels of sorcerer and 40 of a suped up homebrew version of Pale Master. (Bigger hit die, full caster progression that increased the spells know/per day, with added at will supernatural abilites, etc, etc.) My first character was a half dragon-half elf core only pure paladin. At level 25, my paladin could do enough lay on hands damage to one shot the level 50 caster (which is what gave me the idea to make a paladin/grey guard who used Lay on Hands/Grey guard version that lets you damage the living in a Shining/Erupting Burning Finger style). And was immune to all of his specials (fear effects that don't ignore immunity) and half of his known spells.

SilverSheriff
2009-06-08, 05:40 AM
aren't you guys sick of 'are X powerful?' Threads?

Kris Strife
2009-06-08, 05:44 AM
I'm sick of all the 'X is over powered', 'Y is the only thing worth playing', 'who'd play Z?' and 'new cheese' threads personally. Whats wrong with wanting to make a character who has to struggle through some fights and encounters as opposed to one who doesn't even have to roll a die to finish a campaign?

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-06-08, 05:46 AM
aren't you guys sick of 'are X powerful?' Threads?

I passed my fort save.

Talic
2009-06-08, 05:49 AM
No, just Fatigued. :smallbiggrin:

tyckspoon
2009-06-08, 05:54 AM
I'm sick of all the 'X is over powered', 'Y is the only thing worth playing', 'who'd play Z?' and 'new cheese' threads personally. Whats wrong with wanting to make a character who has to struggle through some fights and encounters as opposed to one who doesn't even have to roll a die to finish a campaign?

Nothing wrong with that at all. The point, which admittedly does get completely lost under the detritus of these threads, is to help people know that that is what they're choosing and to help both DMs and players balance out the parties they create (just as an example, if the rest of the party is a ninja/fighter/healer, a follower of these threads would be aware that the party arcanist probably shouldn't be a full-on Wizard. Conversely, if the group is more optimized and is toting something like factotum/warblade/druid, adding in a Truespeaker without at least a few houserules is begging to be irrelevant.)

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-08, 06:08 AM
aren't you guys sick of 'are X powerful?' Threads?


I'm sick of all the 'X is over powered', 'Y is the only thing worth playing', 'who'd play Z?' and 'new cheese' threads personally. Whats wrong with wanting to make a character who has to struggle through some fights and encounters as opposed to one who doesn't even have to roll a die to finish a campaign?

I thought this thread was about a player who had a problem - i.e. a character is perceived as overpowered and as overshadowing the others.

If the OP will answer some questions, maybe we'll get to the bottom of why that is.

Gaiyamato
2009-06-08, 06:10 AM
I dunno a truespeaker can be made to be fairly ok.

I personally think that all of the classes are close.
The actual spells and some magic items are what breaks the game or at least leans it in a certain direction.
Fabricate is just daft. :P

But say you cut the spell lists right down to only a handful of only moderately powerful spells for the casters and removed a few of the cheesier prcs and feats. A stock standard wizard becomes not much better than anyone else in the party.

I've had lots of fun in D&D, also in D&D 3.5 over the decades and never really had a huge problem with balance. If someone takes something over the top I either ban it, nerf it or crush him by dropping somthing large on his head. If it is a party member I "accidently" forget to help him when the DM inevitably gets him in trouble.
I also find the dummer players go for cheesier stuff.

Don't get me wrong, sometimes building something insane is fun. I have over 20,000 characters just for D&D 3.5 on my HDD as it is. I have played 16 of them. lol.

Kris Strife
2009-06-08, 06:10 AM
I thought this thread was about a player who had a problem - i.e. a character is perceived as overpowered and as overshadowing the others.

If the OP will answer some questions, maybe we'll get to the bottom of why that is.

It is, but thats more of a statement on the general tone of these threads, not this particular one... if it wasn't a trolling.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-06-08, 06:12 AM
I'm sick of all the 'X is over powered', 'Y is the only thing worth playing', 'who'd play Z?' and 'new cheese' threads personally.

Very well. What is your proposed solution to take care of the problem?

Kris Strife
2009-06-08, 06:12 AM
Very well. What is your proposed solution to take care of the problem?

Same as any D&D player. Fire.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-06-08, 06:15 AM
Excellent, excellent. Let us burn the OP.

Kris Strife
2009-06-08, 06:16 AM
Are they a witch?

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-06-08, 06:19 AM
Only if he is made out of wood.

Kris Strife
2009-06-08, 06:22 AM
We'll have to see if they'll float then. Any one got a duck?

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-06-08, 06:24 AM
No, ducks are OP because they can fly and swim.

Perhaps we could build a bridge out of him?

ZeroNumerous
2009-06-08, 08:51 AM
Technically Dual Attribute Dependant.

Then I guess that makes everyone but a wizard technically MAD since they will generally need STR/DEX, CON and WIS. My point however is that the druid, like the wizard, only requires one attribute to be at a significantly high level. His CON is less important, but he's going to buff it anyway because everyone likes HP.


Level 50 full caster PC ... And was immune to all of his specials (fear effects that don't ignore immunity) and half of his known spells.

See, there's where you went wrong. At level 50, he just makes an Epic Spell called "Kill Paladin". Which does precisely that(in so far that it kills a paladin).

kamikasei
2009-06-08, 09:03 AM
But say you cut the spell lists right down to only a handful of only moderately powerful spells for the casters and removed a few of the cheesier prcs and feats. A stock standard wizard becomes not much better than anyone else in the party.

"I think you'll find that if you take this Olympic gold medallist sprinter, cut off one of his legs, and break the other, that he will not run much faster than the average man on the street."

This is, what, Oberoni? Something isn't balanced simply because you can change it to make it balanced; indeed, that you have to change it indicates it wasn't balanced to start with.

Kris Strife
2009-06-08, 09:58 AM
See, there's where you went wrong. At level 50, he just makes an Epic Spell called "Kill Paladin". Which does precisely that(in so far that it kills a paladin).

He did. You can take either 'Made my save' or 'he didn't specify which paladin' as the answer. Which ever gives you the most laughs.

ZeroNumerous
2009-06-08, 10:49 AM
He did. You can take either 'Made my save' or 'he didn't specify which paladin' as the answer. Which ever gives you the most laughs.

Make it Target: One Creature and Save: None. Epic Magic lacks things like "balance" and "sense".

EDIT: Heck, make it cast as a free action. Cast it N+1 times, where N is equal to the number of paladins in existence.

Kaiyanwang
2009-06-08, 10:54 AM
Then I guess that makes everyone but a wizard technically MAD since they will generally need STR/DEX, CON and WIS. My point however is that the druid, like the wizard, only requires one attribute to be at a significantly high level. His CON is less important, but he's going to buff it anyway because everyone likes HP.


Maybe I'm wrong, but with the polymorph (new) fix druids keep their HP while wildshape.

So, they need AT LEAST wis and con. Not that this make them weak, but just to say.

(if I didn't understood well, ignore the post, but FAQs seem to go this way)

Eldariel
2009-06-08, 10:56 AM
Maybe I'm wrong, but with the polymorph (new) fix druids keep their HP while wildshape.

So, they need AT LEAST wis and con. Not that this make them weak, but just to say.

(if I didn't understood weel, ignore the post, but FAQs seem to go this way)

This is correct.

ZeroNumerous
2009-06-08, 10:58 AM
So, they need AT LEAST wis and con. Not that this make them weak, but just to say.

He does not need it any more than any other caster does. Even using a base stat set of 8/8/8/8/18/8 the druid is still able to cast buffs to raise his CON to useful levels.

Kaiyanwang
2009-06-08, 11:03 AM
He does not need it any more than any other caster does. Even using a base stat set of 8/8/8/8/18/8 the druid is still able to cast buffs to raise his CON to useful levels.

:smallconfused: Sure? Maybe it depends from the campaing. I mean, if you fight with, say, a lot of demons, you are unlikely to stay buffed for a long time.

For sure, EVERYONE likes have a big con score, because or you have a big HD, and you are deserved to be beaten, or you have a small HD, and you want to raise your HP anyway:smallwink:

Goatman_Ted
2009-06-08, 11:11 AM
[Insert lame joke about Paladins with sufficient Knowledge (Religion) bonuses here]

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-06-08, 11:41 AM
"I think you'll find that if you take this Olympic gold medallist sprinter, cut off one of his legs, and break the other, that he will not run much faster than the average man on the street."


No. Not even then. (http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_22793.aspx)

Killer Angel
2009-06-08, 12:27 PM
Not even then. (http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_22793.aspx)

That's clearly a munchkin. An optimizer who cannot even roleplay a little quirk...
A monk should steal his titanium legs while he's sleeping!


(no offense for anyone having really such problems: my uncle is without an arm, and I know that's no easy)