PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Good feats for an Erudite?



Pika...
2009-08-23, 07:29 PM
Pika,

So I am ending up playing an Erudite (the nerfed version from Complete Crud), in a bi-weekly Forgotten Realms game where the DM ruled psionics is just another form of magic.

This ruling was before I got there, since to my amazement there was another psionic player there (a psion). :smalleek:

Anyway, to play on this fluff I asked to play an Erudite who's goal is to "steal" as many magical spells as he can to give to the psionic community to hopefully "even the odds", and awaken Assupan(sp?) the sleeping psionic deity of Faerun.

I am not currently sure if I will need the Convert Spell to Power level/feat substitution, since it seems he was basically already doing that for free with the psion.

Currently we left off with me needing to redo my character sheet because I did not know he did not allow crafting feats, with the exception of Power Stones and Dojree, since those he is homebrewing a method for making (something about needing Craft: Gemcutting) which I think is kinda cool.

Anyway, now I have two of my bonus feats and my six level feat (we are at sixth level) to work with. For the other two I have taken Skill Knowledge (from Unearthed Arcana) for both Bluff+Diplomacy, and Handle Animal+Ride. As for my Psicrystal Affinity I took Liar.

erikun
2009-08-23, 07:47 PM
Psicrystal Containment (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#psicrystalContainment) and Psionic Meditation (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#psionicMeditation) are good if you're planning on using Metapsionics. This is especially true with Psionic Meditation, as it's the only way you'll be able to use a Metapsionic feat every round. Empower Power, Maximize Power, Twin Power, and Linked Power (the last one from Complete Psionic) are all decent choices. Split Psionic Ray is a bit more specific, but cheaper than Twin Power.

You might consider asking if you can use the Scribe Tattoo (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#scribeTattoo) creation feat, as you aren't likely to find one lying around in a dungeon. :smallwink:

Other than that, wizard standards are always good. Improved Initiative makes you surprised less often, and Speed of Thought (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#speedOfThought) lets you run away easier.

Boost Construct and Psionic Body can be nice with certain builds.

deuxhero
2009-08-23, 07:51 PM
Pika,

So I am ending up playing an Erudite (the nerfed version from Complete Crud), in a bi-weekly Forgotten Realms game where the DM ruled psionics is just another form of magic.

*emphasis added*
Uh, I think this is standard for the FR actually.

Sinfire Titan
2009-08-23, 08:08 PM
See what interpretation of the Unique Powers/Day your DM uses. Basically, there's three versions:


1) As Bruce Cordell and many others believe, where a 20th level Erudite is only capable of manifesting 11 unique powers/day (which contradicts the text in favor of Cordell's editing error).

2) As the text says, and probably intended by Paizo (the class was printed in Dragon, after all). In this case, a 20th level Erudite is capable of manifesting 11 unique powers/power level (1st through 9th)/day. This is how the original Dragon Magazine version was written, as it didn't include Cordell's addendum that contradicts the text.

3) As written completely, where the 20th level Erudite is capable of manifesting 11 unique powers/class level (subtle difference here, but that's one possible interpretation)/day. Arguably broken, may or may not be intended, but it's what the text says.



Under the 1st interpretation, I agree with you. The Erudite is extremely limited and nigh unplayable until 11th. In this case, I recommend using Spell to Power, if only for a few spells that will assist him (Rope Trick, possibly Arcane Fusion). Linked Power is also a good option here.

Under the 2nd, I recommend just plain Erudite until about 6th level (when you can enter Anarchic Initiate, and from there Slayer). This one is on par with a Psion who has a major expansion in powers known, but is only a Tier 2. Adding Spell to Power breaks this interpretation and pushes him up to Tier 1, but only barely.

Under the 3rd, I recommend shooting the DM to spare him the misery of you sifting through every single book that has ever printed a Psionic Power. Heaven forbid he allows this and Spell to Power, as you will have access to any 220 spells or powers of your spontaneous choice each day.

If he uses the 2nd one, you are easily more powerful than the Psion thanks to Power Access alone. If he uses the 3rd, do him a favor and never play an Erudite; he'll die of a heart attack, especially if you optimize.

erikun
2009-08-23, 08:12 PM
Given that Pika said "nerfed version from Complete [Psionic]", I'm guessing the first interpretation. The 2nd is what you'll find on the website (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20060406b), after all.

Sinfire Titan
2009-08-23, 08:15 PM
Given that Pika said "nerfed version from Complete [Psionic]", I'm guessing the first interpretation. The 2nd is what you'll find on the website (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20060406b), after all.

That's the exact same text that's in CP. The same interpretations are possible with the online preview.

archerpwr
2009-08-23, 10:55 PM
Get link power. It lets you sack a first level power (like say call to mind or some other nonsense) to get other powers (I'm thinking mostly out of combat utility and all day buffs here) at almost full pp cap without costing you a unique power that day for each power used.

That said, Erudite is a headache of a class. Shame on you for making your DM put power stones in the party loot.

Flickerdart
2009-08-23, 11:00 PM
Spell to Power makes Erudites Tier 1. If you can take it and don't mind the cheese, then by all means.

Sinfire Titan
2009-08-23, 11:01 PM
Get link power. It lets you sack a first level power (like say call to mind or some other nonsense) to get other powers (I'm thinking mostly out of combat utility and all day buffs here) at almost full pp cap without costing you a unique power that day for each power used.

That said, Erudite is a headache of a class. Shame on you for making your DM put power stones in the party loot.

Or Astral Construct and the Skin of the Construct feat to get tricks. Manifesting Linked Astral Construct at 1+other Power's points never hurt, right?

FMArthur
2009-08-24, 12:27 AM
Linked Power + Metapower repeatedly = cast spells delayed by 1 round at a mind-bogglingly low cost (1 if the spell you Metapowered Linked Power to is first level).

You can abuse Primal Fear (1st level, CPsi) in a disgusting way by augmenting it to hit as many targets as you like, and Linked Power's description says that the power you link shares its targets with the first one...

PId6
2009-08-24, 12:34 AM
Spell to Power makes Erudites Tier 1. If you can take it and don't mind the cheese, then by all means.
If that's allowed, make sure to grab the Arcane Fusion line. Oh, and if your DM's allowing Metapsionic versions of Metamagic feats, get Sanctum Spell as well. Then watch as the campaign bursts into flames. :smallamused:

FMArthur
2009-08-24, 01:34 AM
Arcane Fusion doesn't work because you don't know any spells (unless you're a multiclass sorceror).

On an unrelated note, can CStP Erudites convert spells directly from scrolls? It seems like it's a real pain to have to learn spells and powers from other minds.

PId6
2009-08-24, 01:39 AM
Arcane Fusion doesn't work because you don't know any spells (unless you're a multiclass sorceror).
Just get some with Spell to Power, though I suppose you could say that since it's technically a power now, it doesn't count as a spell. Still, even if that's the case, this particular trick can be done with a single Sorcerer dip for Magic Missile.

FMArthur
2009-08-24, 01:42 AM
Can you elaborate on why it would be helpful to cast magic missile as if it were a fifth-level spell?

PId6
2009-08-24, 01:52 AM
Hmm, I guess if you take the stance that it's a power and not a spell, thus illegal to use within Arcane Fusion, it still wouldn't work with just a sorcerer 1 dip. Oh well, regardless, the general idea is this:

Sanctum Spell makes a spell act as if it were a spell level lower when you're outside your sanctum. Sanctum Arcane Fusion acts as a 4th level spell when you're outside your sanctum. Arcane Fusion doesn't use up spells that you cast using it. So:


Arcane Fusion:
Magic Missile
Sanctum Arcane Fusion:
Magic Missile
Sanctum Arcane Fusion:
Magic Missile
Sanctum Arcane Fusion:
Magic Missile
... and so on until you get bored rolling d4s.


Yeah, infinite storm of missile death. Hope your enemies don't have Shield.

FMArthur
2009-08-24, 02:05 AM
In that case there isn't much point in taking anything but Sorceror anyway.

Convert Spell to Power erudite is very powerful, but I don't think allowing it is equivalent to allowing a character to pull an "I win" trick.

"What are some good options for my character?"
"Well, if you cheat outrageously..."

:smalltongue:

PId6
2009-08-24, 02:08 AM
In that case there isn't much point in taking anything but Sorceror anyway.
Meh, sorcerers need the boost. :smalltongue:

Myrmex
2009-08-24, 05:17 AM
Overchannel can be nice, when you really need to blast or dominate or something, and don't mind taking some pain.

Cyclocone
2009-08-24, 05:28 AM
Take a look at the Extra Unique Power (http://realmshelps.dandello.net/cgi-bin/feats.pl?Extra_Unique_Power,all)feat from Dragon 319.
The benefit text would seems to suggest that the erudite does indeed get unique powers per power level -i.e. option #2.
If it were up to me, I would just go with that option and ignore Bruce Cordell.

Sinfire Titan
2009-08-24, 08:06 AM
Arcane Fusion doesn't work because you don't know any spells (unless you're a multiclass sorceror).

On an unrelated note, can CStP Erudites convert spells directly from scrolls? It seems like it's a real pain to have to learn spells and powers from other minds.

Spell to Power assumes transparency is in effect, so it would go from Sorcerer Spells to Psionic Powers.

FMArthur
2009-08-24, 02:42 PM
Show me where in the description of magic-psionics transparency it says that the descriptions of spells are altered if cast as powers. Isn't it just about how the two interact when used against each other (Spell/Power Resistance, dispelling)? Arcane Fusion is a spell that casts two spells you know. It doesn't say anything about powers (why would it?) and the Convert Spell to Power erudite ACF makes no mention of changes to that sort of thing.

Sinfire Titan
2009-08-24, 02:46 PM
Show me where in the description of magic-psionics transparency it says that the descriptions of spells are altered if cast as powers. Isn't it just about how the two interact when used against each other (Spell/Power Resistance, dispelling)? Arcane Fusion is a spell that casts two spells you know. It doesn't say anything about powers (why would it?) and the Convert Spell to Power erudite ACF makes no mention of changes to that sort of thing.


Psionics-Magic Transparency

Though not explicitly called out in the spell descriptions or magic item descriptions, spells, spell-like abilities, and magic items that could potentially affect psionics do affect psionics.

First sentence?

FMArthur
2009-08-24, 03:06 PM
How does Arcane Fusion affect psionics? That would depend on the spells you cast with your psionic power, wouldn't it? It's a giant leap of logic to take that sentence and say it means that everything that says 'spell' becomes literally synonymous with 'power'. There is no interaction between the two here. Making Arcane Fusion a psionic power doesn't change the fact that it casts two spells.

Sinfire Titan
2009-08-24, 03:13 PM
How does Arcane Fusion affect psionics? That would depend on the spells you cast with your psionic power, wouldn't it? It's a giant leap of logic to take that sentence and say it means that everything that says 'spell' becomes literally synonymous with 'power'. There is no interaction between the two here. Making Arcane Fusion a psionic power doesn't change the fact that it casts two spells.

Because Spell to Power affects spells and is Psionic in nature. Not that illogical, especially not if you read the feats that specify that they don't apply to Transparency. Because those feats specifically call out that they ignore any form of Transparency and Arcane Fusion doesn't, it's assumed that the CStP version of Arcane Fusion applies to Powers.

archerpwr
2009-08-24, 11:26 PM
It's still kind of stupid to be using arcane fusion for your primary combat power. You're seriously learning it at character level 11 at earliest and tossing out fourth level effects. At that point it's seriously a better idea to pick out 3 good psionic general powers from your top level (or appropriately powerful discipline power or spell) and just augment that to full DC in combat while using link power to get all of your out of combat utility and all day buffs. This leaves you with an effect for each save plus anything out of combat and 2 floating effects for **** you really want *right now*.

It's stuff like that that make me generally suggest psion over erudite. Better to be able to pick one *many* level appropriate combat effects (list off the top of my head for an 11th level psion: ego whip, entangling ectoplasm, SoL for will or fort (there are several of these), astral construct, save or lose:reflex with that stupid cocoon power or metamorphosis, toss out other stuff via action ecomomy with schism and friends)


At most levels, your average psion *will* have more power than an erudite (erudite requires optimization to be playable at all). That said, with link power and river XP mechanics, an erudite *does* have more out of combat utility than a psion. It just isn't as good in combat as a psion without a LOT of optimization (psions have a slighly lower optimization power cap).

Corwin Weber
2009-08-25, 12:05 AM
Wait..... "Spell to Power?"

Where do I find this feat?

archerpwr
2009-08-25, 12:07 AM
Wait..... "Spell to Power?"

Where do I find this feat?

It's an alternative class feature in the mind's eye articles on the wizards website. Erudite is basically unplayable without it.

Myrmex
2009-08-25, 01:21 AM
It's an alternative class feature in the mind's eye articles on the wizards website. Erudite is basically unplayable without it.

....What?
Spontaneously picking up to 11 powers per power level is pure gold. While you miss out on cheesy arcane spell abuse, you've got the spontaneity of a sorc with the spells known of a wizard.

Doc Roc
2009-08-25, 01:40 AM
I still hold that Erudite is never lower than tier two unless you get really monstrously drunk to build yours. And if that's unplayable to you, we have no common ground.

FMArthur
2009-08-25, 01:41 AM
I for one think erudites are broken (disfunctional). There's almost no reason to play a psion instead of an erudite at higher levels if you're going by the 'unique powers per day per power level' interpretation, because eventually number of unique powers dwarfs a psion's total powers known. But if it's the total unique powers per day, all powers inclusive, then it's just about unplayably bad until very high levels, where it becomes merely passable.

You could just give it a fixed number of unique powers per level and it would just scale naturally as you gained power levels. Or you could have it be total powers per day, which fits better with psionics' general theme of fluidity between power levels, and have it increase properly with level.

You could also put 'unique powers per day' in a chart similar to the casting progression of vancian casters. You could probably get by with just the wizard's Spells Per Day table, altering first level to give 2 unique powers. Or use the Sorceror's Spells Known table (shifted up by 1).

Doc Roc
2009-08-25, 01:43 AM
I for one think erudites are broken (disfunctional). There's almost no reason to play a psion instead of an erudite at higher levels if you're going by the 'unique powers per day per power level' interpretation, because eventually number of unique powers dwarfs a psion's total powers known. But if it's the total unique powers per day, all spells inclusive, then it's just about unplayably bad until very high levels, where it becomes merely passable.

I'd never heard an interpretation other than the unique-powers per day per power level interpretation until I arrived here.

Corwin Weber
2009-08-25, 01:48 AM
I'd never heard an interpretation other than the unique-powers per day per power level interpretation until I arrived here.

Hey from my reading of it I thought it was 11 powers/day. This is much better. :)

Doc Roc
2009-08-25, 01:51 AM
In... a sense? Basically, I almost never read tables, and instead generally read the text. As the text trumps the table, unless there is an errata, the erudite gets 99 unique powers at level 20, 11 per power level. This is better like having one weasel in your pants is better than two.

archerpwr
2009-08-25, 02:09 AM
....What?
Spontaneously picking up to 11 powers per power level is pure gold. While you miss out on cheesy arcane spell abuse, you've got the spontaneity of a sorc with the spells known of a wizard.

Yeah, at level 20 before the dragon magazine update or with favorable houseruling (ignoring both the of the changed headers in favor of the copy/paste from dragon mag in the text).

Seriously, it's a direct copy paste for the text of unique powers, but the headers are specifically changed. They contradict themselves. Either way you go, it's a house rule and frankly, most DMs look at the table and the titles before a single line buried in the middle of the text.

So, let's look at level 6. Lots of people actually play at level 6. You seriously have 4 unique powers per day. One of those is seriously going to HAVE to be a level 1 power to use with linked power so you can actually do out of combat things. The other three powers are going to be: Dispel Psionics (because it just plain works better than dispel magic), Ego Whip, and something fun like Time Hop.

At level 6, you seriously have 4 offensive actions (summon, dispel magic, ego whip, and time hop). There are encounters that will straight up rape this character every time at this level. Here are some common encounters that this is true for:
Horde of Skeletons
Pair of tigers
Young Black Dragon
Large Air Elemental
Babau
Annis Hag

Seriously, anything with a moderately good will save and any DR, the ability to kite you, or just a decent will save or high cha will just tear you apart. Psion isn't a strong class, but it has an answer to most of these that the erudite straight up *doesn't*. The psion's offensive action list looks like this:
Dispel
Summon
Ego Whip
Time Hop
Ectoplasmic Cocoon
Psionic Minor Creation (for poisons) + summon ACs to deliver it (to stat damage to death basically anything)
Entangling Ectoplasm
Empty Mind (because failing saves is bad)
Energy Ray (retrained to crystal shard later for various reasons)

Seriously, that's a lot of stuff our Erudite straight up cannot do. As is, a sixth level erudite can't deal with a lot of routine challenges. Now, if you wanted to argue that the dragon magazine version (where it is listed as powers per level per day) is a good class, I'd agree. I'd actually say that it might be too strong at every level past six or so (the point where they have better casting than beguilers off of a handpicked list). But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about the Erudite that got nerfed in CP.
I still hold that Erudite is never lower than tier two unless you get really monstrously drunk to build yours. And if that's unplayable to you, we have no common ground.
Did I miss anything earlier in my post here? It's pretty straight forward. Erudite fails as a class because at the most commonly played levels it's straight up more likely to result in player death than the class it is based on.

Edit: +1 to everything written by FMArthur.

Doc Roc
2009-08-25, 02:37 AM
Only the part where I explained my feelings regarding text versus table to make it perfectly clear how I read erudite, which then explains my feelings. Certainly, the headers aren't descriptive, but I don't think your case is quite the Absolute Right Way you make it out to be. I recognize that part of that is your style of writing, but why are you so combative? Why quote where I disagreed with you, then fail to quote where I stated that my argument runs on entirely orthogonal assumptions about the RAW?


In... a sense? Basically, I almost never read tables, and instead generally read the text. As the text trumps the table, unless there is an errata, the erudite gets 99 unique powers at level 20, 11 per power level. This is better like having one weasel in your pants is better than two.

archerpwr
2009-08-25, 02:45 AM
Only the part where I explained my feelings regarding text versus table to make it perfectly clear how I read erudite, which then explains my feelings. Certainly, the headers aren't descriptive, but I don't think your case is quite the Absolute Right Way you make it out to be. I recognize that part of that is your style of writing, but why are you so combative?

I'm not combative. I'm just right. The argument I'm making (and have made in the past) is that people shouldn't suggest Erudite because the vast majority of players don't have the rules lawyer-fu to convince their DM to make it per day per level (which ends up broken as FMArthur so kindly explained) nor the optimization skill not to get owned by a tiger at level five. That some people look at the class and actually understand the game to such an extent that they *can* make a playable character has nothing to do with suggesting that people who have little enough knowledge to come to a forum asking for advice play it. I mean, Iajutsu Focus doesn't make Factotum a good class. Iajutsu Focus makes Iajutsu Focus a good thing for any character. Fundamentally, you can't assume that people will know the exact button to press to win. You have to give them *several* buttons that will win or they will in fact end up having less fun. Erudite doesn't give enough buttons at the levels most commonly played. Heck, even at level 15 you're still probably better off with a psion that happens to invest in psychic churigories than an Erudite without spell to power.

Doc Roc
2009-08-25, 02:49 AM
I would never recommend any full-caster for a new player, no matter the flavor. You should only play a caster if your kung-fu is strong. As for the rest, I think we both know where we stand.

archerpwr
2009-08-25, 02:54 AM
Truth is a three edged sword. Your side, their side, and the truth.
Yeah, and the truth is that Erudite is massive headache to play more often than not. Really, that overtakes any mechanical concerns, but people like Sinfire Titan don't take into account the fact that bookkeeping takes away fun (seriously, look at how often artificer is suggested compared to how often you see CO playtest reports of it, much less stories of the class being used by people outside the CO crowd), so I have to convince them to stop suggesting bad classes in other ways.

I mean, I'm never going to tell Sinfire to stop suggesting artificer because it is in fact actually powerful once it hits level 3 (and a pretty solid trap monkey before that) and some people are totally willing to do extra bookkeeping for that extra power. CO even usually warns people of how much bookkeeping it is. I'm totally fine with that. I'm not fine with them suggesting a variant that is both weaker and more complicated than the base class at the majority of levels.

Edit, since you changed your whole post:

I would never recommend any full-caster for a new player, no matter the flavor. You should only play a caster if your kung-fu is strong. As for the rest, I think we both know where we stand.
Actually, wizards and clerics are actually *easier* to play competently than fighters and rangers. You just show the player two or three "combat spells" and they're pretty much set. Sorcerers, beguilers, and dread necromancers are even easier. I wouldn't suggest a druid for a new player (wild shape and the animal companion tend to be a bit of a hassle).

But yeah, full casters totally can be suggested to new players. You show them a couple combat options, an example spell list, and they say "cool". They keep flipping through the PHB through the rest of the session and figure out what's cool to do out of combat. I do in fact routinely hand sorcerers to new players because it's one of the best classes to introduce people to D&D with.

Doc Roc
2009-08-25, 02:56 AM
Despite having written two major guides to casters, I actually can't stand playing them for very long. They drive you craaaaaaaazy.

archerpwr
2009-08-25, 02:58 AM
Despite having written two major guides to casters, I actually can't stand playing them for very long. They drive you craaaaaaaazy.

See my edit. Casters are generally better to hand to new players than the martial classes.

Sinfire Titan
2009-08-25, 08:14 AM
I for one think erudites are broken (disfunctional). There's almost no reason to play a psion instead of an erudite at higher levels if you're going by the 'unique powers per day per power level' interpretation, because eventually number of unique powers dwarfs a psion's total powers known. But if it's the total unique powers per day, all powers inclusive, then it's just about unplayably bad until very high levels, where it becomes merely passable.

You could just give it a fixed number of unique powers per level and it would just scale naturally as you gained power levels. Or you could have it be total powers per day, which fits better with psionics' general theme of fluidity between power levels, and have it increase properly with level.

You could also put 'unique powers per day' in a chart similar to the casting progression of vancian casters. You could probably get by with just the wizard's Spells Per Day table, altering first level to give 2 unique powers. Or use the Sorceror's Spells Known table (shifted up by 1).

The Erudite is almost as unplayable as the Wilder is under the 11/day interpretation. He effectively gets a PsiReform every 24 hours so he can reselect his powers (something Wilders may do on their own), but the Wilder can take EK to get more powers known while Erudites can't get more unique powers/day.

Spell to Power partially fixes this, making the class playable as early as 11th. The 11/level/day interpretation makes it play like a Spirit Shaman (a Spontaneous Druid with more Spells "Known" than the Sorcerer or Favored Soul could compare to).

In other words, the latter two interpretations are more powerful than the Psion without doubt, but WotC has set such a precedent before. This is the reason I suggest that the Erudite is potentially Tier 1. Spell to Power is undoubtedly Tier 1, though it takes a while to get started (hence people are encouraged to use the Mantled Erudite until 11th, then retrain into StP).

Edit: I do see where Archer is coming from with his angle, and I agree that the various interpretations are nothing more than DM House Rules. But the same can be said of both the Dragon Magazine Erudite and Cordell's interpretation of that one. One of them is just an official house rule that requires house rules to even play.

Pika...
2009-08-25, 09:56 PM
Yeah, and the truth is that Erudite is massive headache to play more often than not. Really, that overtakes any mechanical concerns, but people like Sinfire Titan don't take into account the fact that bookkeeping takes away fun (seriously, look at how often artificer is suggested compared to how often you see CO playtest reports of it, much less stories of the class being used by people outside the CO crowd), so I have to convince them to stop suggesting bad classes in other ways.


Um, did you know some of us actually enjoy the extra book keeping? Not just "tolerate" it.

My first (and so far only...) time playing an artificer was unbelievably fun. The whole bookkeeping track of how much it cost to craft, and my XP poll or actual XP, vs. how much profit I could get of my fellow party members, etc. It was a blast for me! But then again, I am someone who loves playing games like Ragnorak at 1/1/1 server level, or games like Etrin Odyssey, and I LOVE the 3.5 skill system and the mechanics of 3.x, so perhaps it just fills a niche for people like me?

If you ask me the bookkeeping added to the fun, rather than took away from it. (Hmmm. No one mention 3.x vs. 4.0 please...)

Myrmex
2009-08-25, 11:40 PM
See my edit. Casters are generally better to hand to new players than the martial classes.

I recently played with a woman who picked druid for her first ever character. With a little guidance, she was wildly successful. She always had fun and interesting things to do in combat.

Re: Erudite powers/level

I've always thought it was the "99 powers at level 20." Jay-Z might be an Erudite. (http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=1122332723)

archerpwr
2009-08-26, 02:33 AM
Um, did you know some of us actually enjoy the extra book keeping? Not just "tolerate" it.

My first (and so far only...) time playing an artificer was unbelievably fun. The whole bookkeeping track of how much it cost to craft, and my XP poll or actual XP, vs. how much profit I could get of my fellow party members, etc. It was a blast for me! But then again, I am someone who loves playing games like Ragnorak at 1/1/1 server level, or games like Etrin Odyssey, and I LOVE the 3.5 skill system and the mechanics of 3.x, so perhaps it just fills a niche for people like me?

If you ask me the bookkeeping added to the fun, rather than took away from it. (Hmmm. No one mention 3.x vs. 4.0 please...)

I missed this. There's a word in statistics to describe evidence like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlier

Fundamentally, you set your policies based on the majority, not the minority.

Doc Roc
2009-08-26, 02:40 AM
That's incorrect. Outliers are only relevant, conceptually speaking, in cases where you have:


A meaningful sample size.
A meaningful definition for your best fit function.
A relatively good distribution.


Are you familiar with fat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_tail) or long (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-tail_distribution)tail distributions? Wantonly discarding values you merely presume are outliers is a common error leading to wildly erroneous data. It's also a common logical fallacy used to attempt to marginalize the varied opinions of the meaningful minorities.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-08-26, 11:49 AM
I missed this. There's a word in statistics to describe evidence like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlier

Fundamentally, you set your policies based on the majority, not the minority.Or on both. There are a lot of classes with low book work and a couple with a lot of book work. Those classes with a lot of book work cost WotC a relatively minor amount, and including them makes a sizable fraction of their customer base happy without affecting the rest of their base, so WotC's including the option is a good thing for everyone involved.

archerpwr
2009-08-26, 09:35 PM
Or on both. There are a lot of classes with low book work and a couple with a lot of book work. Those classes with a lot of book work cost WotC a relatively minor amount, and including them makes a sizable fraction of their customer base happy without affecting the rest of their base, so WotC's including the option is a good thing for everyone involved.
That's incorrect. Outliers are only relevant, conceptually speaking, in cases where you have:


A meaningful sample size.
A meaningful definition for your best fit function.
A relatively good distribution.


Are you familiar with fat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_tail) or long (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-tail_distribution)tail distributions? Wantonly discarding values you merely presume are outliers is a common error leading to wildly erroneous data. It's also a common logical fallacy used to attempt to marginalize the varied opinions of the meaningful minorities.

Since neither of you are disagreeing that people that like more paperwork are outliers, I'll assume you agree with me that those people are in fact outliers and are simply arguing that outliers should be used as the basis for your general policies for anything.

You don't use outliers to set your basic policy. You make point accomodations for outliers. If you use outliers to set your policy, you end up with crap like slavery (small percent more happy, large percent less happy). Anything that involves human happiness needs to be done with getting the largest possible cross section more happy without making the people outside of that cross section unable to be taken care of.

So, yeah. As a rule Sinfire suggesting Erudite to someone before they explain that they like overly complex stuff makes him a worse person and he should feel bad because he's causing the majority of people that take his advice to be less happy than they would have been otherwise. Making one person happy while making 19 less happy actually makes you a bad person. It's that simple. Outliers don't matter.

Pika...
2009-08-26, 09:52 PM
You don't use outliers to set your basic policy. You make point accomodations for outliers. If you use outliers to set your policy, you end up with crap like slavery (small percent more happy, large percent less happy). Anything that involves human happiness needs to be done with getting the largest possible cross section more happy without making the people outside of that cross section unable to be taken care of.

Yeah, using Slavery and Nazis is the one way to always win an argument, because no one can argue it without being in favor of it.

Not saying your wrong, just saying your wrong for going that low route to win an argument.

And threads only go down-hill from that point, so can a mod please lock this one?

The thread was a bit helpful, but I am curious why it went from "what would be a good feat for this class" to an argument about it's "tier" rating...

archerpwr
2009-08-26, 10:05 PM
{Scrubbed}

Pika...
2009-08-26, 10:18 PM
{Scrubbed}

Sinfire Titan
2009-08-26, 10:24 PM
{Scrubbed}


So I'm a villain now? Because I made people unhappy by posting an interpretation of the RAW?

I cited three possible interpretations, and gave advice for using each of those (including a warning that the Erudite is a broken class), and I'm suddenly the bad guy?




I'm glad there's not that many villains like me in movies. I'd never go to the theater. Ever.

Roland St. Jude
2009-08-26, 10:43 PM
Sheriff of Moddingham: Apparently, the OPs got the information he wanted and this is way off topic now. I'm going to leave this locked.