What Makes Classes Broken? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Zovc

2009-09-04, 02:52 PM

I'm particularly asking about the tier 1 classes here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0), but feel free to address whatever you'd like in this thread.

First and foremost, I'd like to ask that (for the time being, at least) we stick to core materials only. I'm trying to compile a straightforward argument/collection of points that I can present to my DM in hopes of improving his understanding of balance. Currently, DM seems to think that the less core material you use the more you're powergaming (read, "thinks core material is perfectly balanced, and said balance will be upsetted if you allow too much non-core in").

Everyone says full casters are broken; Wizards and Druids are the most so from my understanding. For Wizards, is it the "Batman Wizard" ideology that breaks them? If so, how is it that you make a Batman Wizard? What about druids, why does Wild Shape break them (/does it)? Even with only Monster Manual I at your disposal?

You don't have to address the Wizard or the Druid in particular, you can, for example, put a Cleric next to a Fighter and demonstrate how the cleric can fight just as well (if he can).

I don't mind splatbooks, but if all you do is demonstrate how powerful they can make already broken characters, you'll just get them ruled out. Prove that the Fighter, for example, needs the Complete Warrior to stand a chance against a Wizard (or something of that nature) if you're going to mention it.

Melamoto

2009-09-04, 02:54 PM

the Fighter, for example, needs every available sourcebook to stand a chance against a core-only Wizard (or something of that nature) if you're going to mention it.

Fix'd.

Anyways, take a Wizard. Now turn him into the most powerful creature of his caster level HD. Now put on a selection of Arcane Buffs. Now imagine the fighter is under a selection of Arcane Debuffs. And the fighter is being grappled by tentacles. Keep in mind this is around 7th level, maybe a little higher.

Now, take a Cleric. Now, give him full BAB. Give him improved HP. Give him pretty much every Divine Buff. Now give him more buffs. Now give him healing.

Now, take a Fighter. Give him feats which improve his damage, but they may do nothing to help his Saves, vulnerability to lock down, or actually increase his damage by a significant amount.

Now, take a Monk. Give him nothing.

This is core.

As for a fight at high levels...

Take a Fighter. Now put him in an invulnerable Forcecage. Now have him take 1d4 Con damage a round. Now watch the player cry, burn his character sheet, and roll a Wizard.

quick_comment

2009-09-04, 02:55 PM

Even with every single sourcebook available, the fighter cannot stand up to the wizard without becoming a wizard himself via UMD

Eldariel

2009-09-04, 02:56 PM

I direct you here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=4938.0), a thread that addresses the said points better than I could with the time allotted to me. The short answer though:

Wizard: Spells
Cleric: Spells + Being Nutty Fighter + Domains
Druid: Extra Character + Being Superb Fighter + Being Full Caster - also, Spells

Sorcerer: Spells

JeenLeen

2009-09-04, 02:58 PM

From what I can tell, the reason pure casters are considered broken, and wizards more broken than sorcerers, is versatility.

A well-designed wizard can prepare spells for almost every eventuality. There are enough ways to capture and kill non-casters, such as Forcecage or simply blasting them while flying, that fighters don't really stand a chance. And if they ever do get the edge: Teleport.

Splat-books make it more broken. Initiate of the Seven Viels is "you can't touch me" and Incanatrix makes metamagic a lot cheaper.

I'm not sure how a core-only Cleric or Druid would be broken. I do think they'd be better than a core-only fighter, though. The buffs they can do on themselves, in addition to magical attacks or debuffs, gives them the edge.

lsfreak

2009-09-04, 03:02 PM

The biggest offender is spells. Spells take a single of your two actions to use, and were not testing in the way people use them now. Grease, glitterdust, web, and solid fog can take out an entire encounter - or at least make it easy enough that it's no longer threatening - with a single spell. Compare that with what a fighter can do with a single action, and you get one attack for (without non-core) a fraction of the target's hit points.

Hit point damage is also the worst way you can spend your actions. Whether someone's at 1 hit point of 10000, their power isn't diminished. Compare this with negative levels, ability damage, or status effects and you can quickly see why the hit-point-only classes fall way behind.

Action economy is another thing. Druids have an animal companion that even in core deals almost as much damage as a fighter, and that's not even considering the druid itself.

A final thing is that the way melee are built doesn't make sense. The more trained they are, the more they don't want to move. They take the entire action to deal full damage, or they only get one attack that does a fraction of the damage. Compare that with a wizard that can unload his full power every turn whether he has to move or not.

RagnaroksChosen

2009-09-04, 03:03 PM

I think its a combination of things..

I think the cleric in core is unbalanced.
It can fight just as well as a fighter especially when it gets divine power.
it can over come traps via summon monster.
It can do the social role via spells.

I think the druid is unbalanced because it has 3-4 dump stats.. really only cares about wisdom and con.
even though it dumps every thing but con and wis... it can still
cast spells
can over come traps with summon natures ally
Fight as well as a fighter if not better
Still cast spells while fighting better then a fighter
gets a companion which is about on par with a fighter (at lower levels)

Wizards 7+ and sorcerers8+
Have some of the best spells in the game
End encounters with a single spell
Fight as well as a fighter(poly morph) if not better.
Can blast better in core then fighter, barbarian, or rogue
Can over come traps with summon monster/other spells.

And that's with out stepping out side of core.

core is not balanced as the 4 most broken classes are core... Wizard cleric sorcerer druid.

Tyndmyr

2009-09-04, 03:09 PM

Heck, most of non-core isn't even that powerful. Sure, certain classes, a few feats, and a few odd combos can be ridiculously powerful, but for every amazing class, there's several that are just aright, and plenty that I would never touch. Yknow, caster classes that destroy your caster level progression...horribly specialized classes that completely fail when they meet a given energy resistance....truenamer.

Balance is, roughly speaking, how powerful you are overall. What happens to that fighter when he meets something that can't be, or shouldn't be dealt with by charging? A rust monster, as a relatively reasonable example. In that case, a caster isn't really impeded at all, where the guy with the pointy stick is of relatively little use. The opposite is very rarely true.

PairO'Dice Lost

2009-09-04, 03:11 PM

Essentially, the old "linear warriors, quadratic wizards" saying has it right. Versatility and spell power are part of the problem, but this is what I believe is the core of it.

Power level: Warriors progress linearly because they rely on skills and feats; you get one feat every few levels and can advance one rank in each skill every level. Most warrior feats deal with minuscule numerical enhancements (+1 to this, +2 to that) or require prior bad feats in a chain to "justify" their power (which means even good feat chains average out to a linear progression). Wizards progress exponentially because each level of spells is more than a linear increase on the power level of the last level of spells--a level 2 spell is more than twice as good as a level 1 spell and so forth.

Versatility: Each feat lets you do one (or occasionally a handful) of things, and most are highly-specialized: Dodge gives a +1 dodge bonus against one creature, for instance. Each individual spell is often quite versatile: even a purely-damaging spell like scorching ray lets you divide the damage among multiple targets or stack it on one. In addition, where the fighter gains one feat at a time, casters gain multiple spells at each level. The first is breadth (how many things can you do?) and the second is depth (how good is the thing you can do?) This means that while the fighter is advancing linearly in terms of capabilities, the caster is advancing quadratically, because where the fighter has to specialize to be good (depth > breadth) or else he'll suck at many things (breadth > depth), the caster improves in versatility and power (breadth and depth) at the same time.

Eldariel

2009-09-04, 03:11 PM

K, the short version of kicking ass in Core as a caster, listing few of the insane/strong spells (also remember that Contingency is basically the best core defense along with Greater Mirror Image and the like so Wizos are hard to kill):
Alter Self (turn into e.g. Trogdolyte; 6 NA for a level 2 spell 10 min/level?)
Polymorph (turn into e.g. an X-Headed Hydra where X is your HD; a ****ton of natural attacks much? Few buffs and you eviscerate anything)
Polymorph Any Object (it does all of above - permanently; two castings is always permanent - also, can be used to gain you better INt-score for example)
Shapechange (turn into a Pit Fiend a rip someone's soul out, then turn into a Choker and get some extra actions and Polymorph yourself into a form with better physicals while maintaining the Quick Actions - just as few examples)

Lesser Planar Binding (your own Nightmare; those are pretty insane. Circlet of Persuasion, Cloak of Charisma and preparations + debuffing the Bound creature (and dismissing after you win the check) practically guarantee victory in the opposed Charisma-check)
Planar Binding (get yourself a nice Glabrezu tank for example; it beats basically anything CR appropriate with your support)
Greater Planar Binding (your own Pit Fiend! Moment of Prescience = autosuccess on the opposed Charisma check paying nothing)
Gate (whenever you feel you need a Great Wyrm Gold Dragon for a fight... Note the 1 round/level of absolute command)

Glitterdust (area-of-effect "everything is blind" - just check the rules for what that entails...)
Web (area-of-effect "stuff can't move, stuff further away has a total cover, you can't really break free unless you're freakishly strong and even then it takes a while; oh, and even if you MAKE your save, you're still screwed")
Grease (your weapon is now greased; make Reflex-save vs. an obscene number or drop it. Ground under you is now Greased; make your Reflex-save and hope you have tons of Dex and ranks in Balance or you're flat-footed and can't move anyways)
Ray of Enfeeblement (no save, lose some Str)
Color Spray (those Ogres? All stunned)
Sleep (more of above, with longer casting time but also longer range thus arguably being slightly safer)
Fog Cloud (just...see, what the spell does[/b]

And that's for the first 2 levels. Wizards can just wreck the battlefield entirely, while Cleric buffs with Quickened Divine Favor + Divine Power and shows Fighter why exactly his Greater Weapon Spec isn't really amazing.

Druids have nice stuff like Control Winds (Destroy Target City...a level 5 spell), Giant Vermin (generate yourself a Colossal Scorpion with high enough CL [which is very buffable with Beads of Karma and Orange Prism Ioun Stone] - just check that thing's stats), all the Summon Nature's Allys, Entangle (yeah, kinda like Grease except more Brutal), Soften Earth and so on.

Make no mistake, Druid's power is more in summoning a bunch of guys, buffing them and his AC [see Animal Growth for example] and going to town, all this while Wildshaped into e.g. Brown Bear and fighting just as well as the tougher Fighters. Also, buffed AC with Bardings alone tends to be in the same league as a tough Fighter. See Barkskin, Greater Magic Fang and so on.

AC progression goes something like Riding Dog (war-trained) > Dire Bat > Brown Bear > Dire Lion > Dire Bear > Dire Tiger/Tyrannosaur. Keeping any of those all the way is just fine too. But yeah, as a bonus, Druids have the most destructive spells in the game, and they also have blasty spells that last long enough to be able to go one encounter with a single Produce Flame/Call Lightning/whatever.

Much of the problem is that Core-only Fighter/Barbarian/Whatever doesn't have enough feats to get anything cool. You take Improved Trip, Power Attack, Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes and Improved Initiative and you're about done.

There really just aren't feats of great impact left after that. This means the core warrior power level is really low, which further compounds this problem; they aren't even amazing at the frontlining which should be their thing.

Sinfire Titan

2009-09-04, 03:14 PM

I'm particularly asking about the tier 1 classes here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0), but feel free to address whatever you'd like in this thread.

The reason Tier 1 is Tier 1 is because of a couple of reasons:

Capable of bypassing entire adventures with a combination of their spells.
Capable of ending entire encounters using 4 or 5 of their 50+daily resources,
Capable of stepping outside of system-enforced restrictions, such as feats, class features, wealth by level, etc.
Capable of covering an entire party's worth of abilities on a day-to-day basis. A party of 4 Wizards, be it Core or otherwise, will be more than sufficient for replacing the stereotypical Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard party.
Able to shift their entire build within 24 hours merely by resting and preparing new spells.
Able to step outside of the action economy, even in Core-only environments.
Most of the overpowered spells are actually in core, thus many DMs overlook their power.

First and foremost, I'd like to ask that (for the time being, at least) we stick to core materials only. I'm trying to compile a straightforward argument/collection of points that I can present to my DM in hopes of improving his understanding of balance. Currently, DM seems to think that the less core material you use the more you're powergaming (read, "thinks core material is perfectly balanced, and said balance will be upsetted if you allow too much non-core in").

I point to Shapechange, Candles of Invocation, Time Stop, Glittedust, Grease (it's capable of preventing Big T from moving), Solid Fog, Disjunction, Sleep, Color Spray, Gate, Wall of Iron, Fabricate, and a dozen other spells that are capable of breaking the rules or ending combat entirely.

For the record, a Wizard who prepares Disjunction+Quickened Grease is capable of shutting down anything that can't fly naturally and relies on a Base Land Speed (pretty much every noncaster in the game).

Everyone says full casters are broken; Wizards and Druids are the most so from my understanding. For Wizards, is it the "Batman Wizard" ideology that breaks them? If so, how is it that you make a Batman Wizard? What about druids, why does Wild Shape break them (/does it)? Even with only Monster Manual I at your disposal?

The Batman Wizard is merely Crazy Prepared. They are capable of dominating the game, but the intent behind LN's guide is to point the players into a supporting role consisting of buffing and similar abilities, to make it seem like the party is actually working together. He's pretty much acknowledging the fact that the Wizard is the most powerful class because of its spells, and then telling you to hold back a little.

Wild Shape allows you to bypass the Point Buy system. It turns a Str 8, Dex 8, Con 14 Druid from supporting line into Front-line combatant with a handful of buffs (about 3). Animal Companions are capable of replacing a front-line Fighter outright, and can be replaced completely within 24 hours of dying with no further investment on the party's behalf.

There spells only complicate the matter. THis is why one of the biggest suggestions for fixing them is removing the Wild Shape ability entirely, giving them the Ranger's version of the Animal Companion, and telling them to just be a caster. It doesn't solve all of the problems, but it helps. Giving the Ranger Wild Shape or the Druid's Animal Companion is also a good way to fix what's wrong with the Ranger (its more of a patch that has chocolate all over it though).

You don't have to address the Wizard or the Druid in particular, you can, for example, put a Cleric next to a Fighter and demonstrate how the cleric can fight just as well (if he can).

Given 3 rounds of prep time, the Cleric casts Divine Power, Righteous Might, and one other Buff spell. With Quicken spell, he can do this in two rounds. Hell, the first two alone are enough to get him through the combat. He then moves up to the front line and uses healing spells whenever he feels threatened.

Or he sits back and buffs the party, and lets his Planar Ally spell do its job.

I don't mind splatbooks, but if all you do is demonstrate how powerful they can make already broken characters, you'll just get them ruled out. Prove that the Fighter, for example, needs the Complete Warrior to stand a chance against a Wizard (or something of that nature) if you're going to mention it.

As others have said, Splat Books add more to the non-casters than it does to the casters (really, the only splats that add significant bonuses to the casters are CM, CArc, Spell Compendium, PH2, CD, CC, and the MIC).

Later on in 3.5's dying life, the splats became a bit more balanced. With Tome of Battle, Magic of Incarnum, PH2, Dungeonscape (with limits on Font of Inspiration), Binders from Tome of Magic, DFAs from Dragon Magic, and PsiWars from the XPH, you are capable of running a fairly balanced campaign if you ban Core classes and UMD abuse.

Tyndmyr

2009-09-04, 03:19 PM

You might be a munchkin if your answer to this question is...

I do.

Quietus

2009-09-04, 03:41 PM

As written, Core IS balanced - if you play the way the game was playtested, which means blaster wizards, healbot clerics, damage/tank fighters, and sneaky thieves. The problem is, they didn't bother to balance the parts which allow certain classes to play in ways they weren't tested for - the Divine Power/Divine Favor/Righteous Might combo for the Cleric, for instance, which gives it as much HP as the fighter, the same base attack, +3 bonus to attack/damage, and a size increase. Or the Wizard who focuses on battlefield control, using Grease to make anything in armor unable to move, or drops save-or-suck spells targeting a foe's weakest save.

The real trouble is that splatbooks don't just make Fighters, Monks, and other perceived "underpowered" classes better. They improve EVERY class, and unfortunately, improving on something that ranks 10/10 (wizard, cleric, etc) is a bigger improvement over something that ranks less than that (fighter, monk, etc). The key is a discerning eye when players are building their character, and conversation among the group. If the Dm lays out the rules of "Okay guys, I want this to be a medium power level game - don't make anything that can destroy or shut down a foe with only a couple rounds", he should be okay.

Be patient with your DM. If he's been disallowing splatbooks for a long time, he's going to be very leery. I've experienced this myself, so I took up a DM position in our rotation, and opened up everything WotC except setting books, and made myself available to the players to help pick out choice material - stuff that would advance their FUN, without breaking the game. With any luck, this will help to show the other DMs I play with that splatbooks, properly used, aren't as scary as they thought they were.

HailDiscordia

2009-09-04, 03:43 PM

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-04, 03:48 PM

Kesnit

2009-09-04, 03:50 PM

Milskidasith

2009-09-04, 03:51 PM

At lower levels, yes, a wizard *might* have problems killing things. The fighter is around because, despite being useless on his own, a Wizard needs *somebody* to kill whoever he dazes/stuns/knocks down/blinds. (With sleep, you can just CDG, but sleep is fairly limited.)

Past maybe level 5, a wizard can beat a fighter in terms of damage dealt to damage taken, and shut down everything.

Eldariel

2009-09-04, 03:52 PM

I'm not going to argue that the fighter is equal to the wizard, it clearly is not. But is that the worst thing in the world? And I really think that one of the things that people often do not take into account when talking about this stuff is the overall arc of going from level 1-20. Sure, a level one wizard has some tricks but overall they are extremely limited and fragile. A fighter can do the same thing all day at that level. That sounds sort of like balance to me. The fact is a wizard needs a fighter (or some other party members) to help them get to the point that they can do all of that ridiculous stuff. A 1st level wizard can be killed by any archer without putting up a fight.

When you are creating a wizard in a vacuum and dropping them into a world fully formed as a master of the arcane, then yes they are going to be dominant. They should be, they're wizards! But the idea of a party of four wizards filling every role and kicking butt is sort of ridiculous. How did they get to that point? If you want to talk about balancing something start everyone at 1st level. If they die, then they make a new character who has a little less XP then everyone else.

In the earlier incarnations of D&D magic users needed twice as much XP as a thief to advance. That is an acknowledgement that their top end speed is the best in the game, we all know that. It is balanced out by making it harder to get to, so when you remove that it is of course unbalanced. In our last campaign with a wizard (an optimized conjurer who went into Alienist) he was very powerful, but rarely did he dominate an encounter immediately because he made it a point to be very concerned about his safety. Once he was able to his first action in every combat was usually casting invisibility on himself, if he didn't he knew that every opponent was gunning for him.

Of course level 1 Wizard needs protection, but by the time level 3 spells roll around, Wizards are already very able to handle themselves. And level 1 Wizards are far more fearsome than level 1 Fighters offensively; Color Spray, Sleep, Grease, Ray of Enfeeblement and Enlarge Person can just do things that are more powerful than what a Fighter could do (and they have 3-5 slots; 3 for Human Specialist, 4 for Gray Elf Specialist, 5 for Gray Elf Focused Specialist - no point in not specializing on level 1 given you need the extra slots for endurance; that means they can spare a level 1 spell/encounter).

Though it is true that on first level, things are more balanced. Indeed, 2xBarbarian+2xWizard combo is incredibly efficient (on back of Enlarge Person + Guisarmes + Improved Trip). 2xDruid+2xWizard is also very fearsome, packing even more magical mojo with ACs acting as Fighters. But it's 3/4th of the adventuring career where things are pretty busted up. Though as stated repeatedly, this gets better out-of-core; just toss ToB into the deal and Fighter-types suddenly keep up until level ~10 just fine.

RagnaroksChosen

2009-09-04, 03:54 PM

When you are creating a wizard in a vacuum and dropping them into a world fully formed as a master of the arcane, then yes they are going to be dominant. They should be, they're wizards! But the idea of a party of four wizards filling every role and kicking butt is sort of ridiculous. How did they get to that point? If you want to talk about balancing something start everyone at 1st level. If they die, then they make a new character who has a little less XP then everyone else.

Realy?
you defiently can make 4 wizards even at level one that will rock all the typical slots...

Summoner for the "tank"
Evoc/conjurer for the dmg dealer.
a conjuration or illusionist for BC
and the last one is free form
though i would pick a necromancer
Little bit of every thing(healing thriough the BOED necro spell, tanking through animate dead, BC with debuffs)

Wings of Peace

2009-09-04, 03:59 PM

Eldariel

2009-09-04, 04:10 PM

So the classes and prcs that resemble the fighter's prc options :smallsmile:

For Fighter PrCs, just turn to 3.0. There's actually a relatively good variety of decent ones in 3.0...3.5 only has Barbarian PrCs of any decency.

HailDiscordia

2009-09-04, 04:18 PM

Realy?
you defiently can make 4 wizards even at level one that will rock all the typical slots...

Summoner for the "tank"
Evoc/conjurer for the dmg dealer.
a conjuration or illusionist for BC
and the last one is free form
though i would pick a necromancer
Little bit of every thing(healing thriough the BOED necro spell, tanking through animate dead, BC with debuffs)

A summoner as the tank? I'm pretty sure that summoning creatures is a full round action so while they are doing that they are being attacked. And then whatever is summoned disappears after a round, once again leaving the wizards exposed.

What kind of damage does a first level conjurer or evoker do? Not nearly as much as a greataxe with a halfway decent STR.

I don't know what a BC is, so maybe you're right.

Plus, they are probably wandering aimlessly through the woods with no ranger to help them. No spot or listen to detect the goblins sneaking up. Plus, people sometimes do make their saves, even Will saves for fighters. So it's not like Color Spray and Sleep are all powerful (they are great, don't get me wrong).

Morty

2009-09-04, 04:19 PM

D&D is a game, and people play it to have fun. IMO (and I have been there), spending every combat round being ineffective when compared to the rest of the party gets very dull. So yes, it is one of the worst things in the D&D world - being forced to play a class you don't want to play in order to be effective. (I prefer melee types and really don't like primary casters.)

Right, except unless you do a very bad job at making your meleer and the party wizard follows TLN's guide to the letter, you can be effective before hitting high levels. Just perhaps not as much as the wizard or the cleric, and not always. On high levels, things indeed get worse.
Now, before people come with walls of text and numbers, I won't argue that classes are all neat, dandy and balanced. But the imbalances prior to 10+ level are seriously overexagerrated around here, often because people like to jump on the "wizards pwnzorz fighters" bandwagon. And seriously, ever since I started playing D&D and browsing the forums, opinion of melee classes went from "underpowered on high levels, weaker than casters overall" to "can't do anything but to trip over their own weapons, ever".

Diamondeye

2009-09-04, 04:21 PM

Boci

2009-09-04, 04:25 PM

Right, except unless you do a very bad job at making your meleer and the party wizard follows TLN's guide to the letter, you will be effective before hitting high levels. Just perhaps not as much as the wizard or the cleric. On high levels, things indeed get worse.
Now, before people come with walls of text and numbers, I won't argue that classes are all neat, dandy and balanced. But the imbalances prior to 10+ level are seriously overexagerrated around here, often because people like to jump on the "wizards pwnzorz fighters" bandwagon.

At level 5, a wizard can fly. Even at level one, any ability of the fighter pales in comparison to what colour spray can do. To be fair, until 2rd level spells become available (glitter dust), the wizard aren't that far ahead, but even then at level 1 a fighter can contribute pretty much nothing out of combat, were as a wizard's spells allow him to do so.

Zovc

2009-09-04, 04:26 PM

Weak/uncreative DMs

I'm interested in what you mean by this.

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-04, 04:29 PM

Munchkin players

Careful. Them's fighting words.

Morty

2009-09-04, 04:29 PM

At level 5, a wizard can fly. Even at level one, any ability of the fighter pales in comparison to what colour spray can do. To be fair, until 2rd level spells become available (glitter dust), the wizard aren't that far ahead, but even then at level 1 a fighter can contribute pretty much nothing out of combat, were as a wizard's spells allow him to do so.

Question: have you actually seen a 3rd level wizard totally outshine a fighter? Because I have played a low-level wizard on par with an unoptimized ranger and rogue.

Temet Nosce

2009-09-04, 04:30 PM

Honestly, it's really pretty simple but I'll sum it up the way I see it.

They have multiple options to end encounters without expending more than minimal resources.

Basically, presented with a given situation a caster will almost always have a way of ending it easily, quickly, and without expending any real effort.

Boci

2009-09-04, 04:30 PM

I'm interested in what you mean by this.

I think he means DM who do not go out of their way to make sure wizards are chalanged and the fighters can shine. However the fact that DMs have to go out of their way indicates some advantages to the wizard.

Eldariel

2009-09-04, 04:31 PM

Plus, they are probably wandering aimlessly through the woods with no ranger to help them. No spot or listen to detect the goblins sneaking up. Plus, people sometimes do make their saves, even Will saves for fighters. So it's not like Color Spray and Sleep are all powerful (they are great, don't get me wrong).

BC = Battlefield Control. And yeah, people make their saves, but the chance of making the save is lower than the chance of missing with a weapon making them much more reliable (not to mention, multitargeting). Rangers suck at Spot and Listen.

You'll want a Druid for those thanks to them being able to focus on Wis almost exclusively and having Spot and Listen in class making them far better in those than a Ranger, and indeed in Survival too (hell, they get +2 through class feature). That said, on level 1, a Gray Elf Wizard with cross-class maxed Spot & Listen is just fine with regards to noticing sneaks compared to all non-Druid classes.

But I think he's wrong - summoners don't take off from level 1 without lots of work. Indeed, I'd say you need to be level 3-5 to be able to pull it off. Then again, as level 1 is a ****ing rocket launcher tag anyways (one failed save/one crit and you die) and it doesn't really matter what class you play; level 1 is really more about attributes than classes (for example, a level 1 Wizard is only 1 point behind a level 1 Fighter in terms of archery given a bow to both; if he happened to have 18 Str, he'd be just as fearsome, though with worse weapon proficiencies).

3 main things make classes broken:

Munchkin players

Internet theory

Weak/uncreative DMs

Sure some classes are significantly more powerful than others, but usually it's not that the classes are broken.

No. Reading core spell list makes it broken. The only way to play a game without casters being broken is either the caster players knowing precisely what they're doing and intentionally toning them down, or the caster players not knowing what all their spells do, which often happens (sadly enough).

Many people don't read their class's spell options comprehensively and default to simple spells they think are the best option (often Fireball/Magic Missile/Scorching Ray - basically, whatever has the largest number of damage dice per level).

As soon as someone reads the core spells, the game is unbalanced.

Boci

2009-09-04, 04:31 PM

Question: have you actually seen a 3rd level wizard totally outshine a fighter? Because I have played a low-level wizard on par with an unoptimized ranger and rogue.

I'm not talking about power level. I'm talking about options avalable. Melee can attack, and if they are built very narrowly, trip, disarm or bulrush well. Wizards have far more options. When can a melee character fly?

Morty

2009-09-04, 04:36 PM

I'm not talking about power level. I'm talking about options avalable. Melee can attack, and if they are built very narrowly, trip, disarm or bulrush well. Wizards have far more options. When can a melee character fly?

However, a melee character can attack pretty much all day, dealing damage consistently, even if limited by his own HP. A caster has few spell slots per day. A wizard can fly - for five minutes - but though he renders himself untouchable by melee attacks this way, it's one slot gone that he might have used for a slow, a stinking cloud or something else. And he can still be shot at - unless he uses Protection From Arrows or a Wind Wall, but that's another 2nd or 3rd level slot gone.

Or the caster players not knowing what all their spells do, which often happens (sadly enough).

So... it's bad when caster players don't manage to break the game?

TheThan

2009-09-04, 04:39 PM

The problem with wizards, druids, clerics (and to a lesser degree sorcerers) is that there are many spells in the game that are simply put broken.

These spells allow a caster to “win” an encounter with the simple casting of one or two spells. In other cases, these spells allow the caster and his party to completely circumvent an encounter, thereby making all the time and effort the Dm put into said encounter wasted time and effort. This is the primary reason why these “top tier” characters are broken. But there are others.

For druids and clerics, their brokeness also comes from the fact that with little effort, they can quickly become a more formidable warrior than the fighter, barbarian, ranger or paladin. The cleric can wear heavy armor, carry a shield, wield a variety of good weapons and still sling spells as good as the wizard or sorcerer. In addition to this, there are two particular spells that allow clerics to become melee killing machines, these are divine favor (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/divineFavor.htm) and divine power (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/divinePower.htm).

Druids have the incredible ability to wild shape into an animal. wild shape functions like alternate form (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#alternateForm). Combined with a feat that allows them the cast their spells while wild shaped, and a druid can easily outpace a fighter in combat.

In summation, wizards, sorcerer, druids and clerics have powers that give them incredible abilities as well as versatility that the other mundane classes cannot match.

Eldariel

2009-09-04, 04:42 PM

So... it's bad when caster players don't manage to break the game?

No, it's sad when caster players don't know what their spells do. Knowing what you can do doesn't force you to break the game, but means that you're aware of the potential and thus can consciously make fair choices instead of accidentally making the right choices until you wanna try out Polymorph and accidentally break the game.

Knowing what you do gives you a control over what you do and thus allows you to play at just the right power level. And frankly, it's sad that so many options are wasted to many players just 'cause they are too lazy to read ~100 spells. Doesn't take longer than a day.

Ignorance is never the answer.

Morty

2009-09-04, 04:44 PM

No, it's sad when caster players don't know what their spells do. Knowing what you can do doesn't force you to break the game, but means that you're aware of the potential and thus can consciously make fair choices instead of accidentally making the right choices until you wanna try out Polymorph and accidentally break the game.

Fair enough, I suppose.

Knowing what you do gives you a control over what you do and thus allows you to play at just the right power level. And frankly, it's sad that so many options are wasted to many players just 'cause they are too lazy to read ~100 spells. Doesn't take longer than a day.

As long as they have fun not tweaking their spell lists towards maximum efficiency and instead going with what they feel like preparing, I really fail to see the problem.

Diamondeye

2009-09-04, 04:45 PM

No. Reading core spell list makes it broken. The only way to play a game without casters being broken is either the caster players knowing precisely what they're doing and intentionally toning them down, or the caster players not knowing what all their spells do, which often happens (sadly enough).

Many people don't read their class's spell options comprehensively and default to simple spells they think are the best option (often Fireball/Magic Missile/Scorching Ray - basically, whatever has the largest number of damage dice per level).

As soon as someone reads the core spells, the game is unbalanced.

Nope. This is only true in internet theory.

Boci

2009-09-04, 04:45 PM

However, a melee character can attack pretty much all day, dealing damage consistently, even if limited by his own HP.

The problem is, if there is 4th encounter, but which time most of the wizards spells have run out, there was also a 1st anbd a second in which htey shined. Just because there is a 1st and second encounter does not mean there will be a fourth. Plus in my expirience, there are only very rarely more than three encounters per day.

A caster has few spell slots per day. A wizard can fly - for five minutes - but though he renders himself untouchable by melee attacks this way, it's one slot gone that he might have used for a slow, a stinking cloud or something else. And he can still be shot at - unless he uses Protection From Arrows or a Wind Wall, but that's another 2nd or 3rd level slot gone.

Even if a class can go nova once per day, its still disheartening. Because at full power they are miles ahead of you melee, were as you are only more powerful than them when their power is spent.

Nope. This is only true in internet theory.

I have played in games were casters have dominated the game from level 1, becuase everyone had equal understanding pof the system, and the catser just happened to have a character concept that went against damaging spells. Without the advantage of greater game knowledge, and the DMs reluctance to have more than 4 encounters a day, there was no way melee was going to be as effective as the caster.

Concealment caused the fighter and paladin to miss with their atatcks, whilst the catser laugh at the wierd concept of needing an attack roll to effect opponents, and so on.

Eldariel

2009-09-04, 04:50 PM

Nope. This is only true in internet theory.

So you're saying you never thought of casting Polymorph before going online? You never thought of Polymorphing into a Hydra 'cause they're absolute melee beasts? You never thought of casting Glitterdust before going online? You never thought of casting Grease before going online? Or is your argument that the spells don't actually create a chasm of power between the classes? What part of all this is internet theory?

Zovc

2009-09-04, 04:56 PM

I'm beginning to think Diamondeye is a troll, he just contradicts everyone without explaining himself. At least these "internet theorists" present the backings of their cases.

HCL

2009-09-04, 05:01 PM

I am just going to say this. Full casters can summon monsters and shapeshift into them. Now, do you think that when the devs came up with monsters they thought of how they would fight against all of the others?

shadow_archmagi

2009-09-04, 05:05 PM

Here's a list of my favorite broken spells. To keep it short, I'll drop one from each level:

1st Level: Color Spray. Instantly incap whole encounters (admittedly, not for very long, but you know)

2nd Level: Blindness. An informal insta-kill. Basically "Your AC is now crap. Oh, you wanted to attack me? First, pick a square, and then roll to hit. If you guessed the right square, flip a coin. If you rolled, flipped, and guessed correctly, you may hit. I find this to be the most hilarious of spells, simply because it is so horribly cruel. I mean, seriously? Blind forever?

I was playing Dungeons And Dragons Online the MMORPG and there was a quest where the party was not allowed to kill any of the Kobold Prophets. So I cast blind on them. Between slow move speed, inaccurate guesses, and the 50% miss chance, the pile of nine prophets (accrued over the entire dungeon) did a grand total of about nine damage despite constantly chasing us and trying to kill us.

3rd level: Suggestion. Negate any problem that could be solved by someone doing what you want. "I'm sorry sir, I forgot my invitation. You should let us in anyway." "I realize you've been hired by the archmage, Mr. Doomsword, but now would be a great time to visit family instead of defending him"

4th level: Polymorph. Anything that can do, I can do also... Fighters love being hydras, because what every fighter needs is to be able to make five attacks per round and gain regeneration.

5th level: I don't think I really need to continue this list because it's already gotten pretty silly.

Notice the progression? Not only do spells because more powerful and longer lasting, but they also grow in utility and flexibility. These aren't even off an official list; I just went to the SRD and hit "wizard spells" and started scrolling through. But yeah. There's all KINDS of problems that could be solved by Polymorph. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that a player with a strong knowledge of the monster manuals could play through an entire campaign using just Polymorph and always feel like an effective member of the group. "I'll turn you into a blob to sneak under that door" he says "I'll turn you into a hydra to fight the enemy hydra so that it'll be 1 hydra vs 1 hydra and an adventuring party!"

EDIT:

Note. "Broken" is hardly the word to describe the Tier 1 classes. They're simply vastly better and more versatile. In a game where you wanted to play superpowered, world-changing heroes, they'll work fine.

Yukitsu

2009-09-04, 05:20 PM

Question: have you actually seen a 3rd level wizard totally outshine a fighter? Because I have played a low-level wizard on par with an unoptimized ranger and rogue.

Yes. Level 3 is where I pull ahead to a fairly large degree with my standard casters. Alchemy for a bit of combat endurance, and careful use of spells will get me through 4 encounters every day, even if doing missions solo. A challenge that the fighters failed to manage in that particular set up.

Zovc

2009-09-04, 05:36 PM

quick_comment

2009-09-04, 05:52 PM

Level 1: Casters win via color spray or sleep
Level 2: As above
Level 3: Caster wins via glitterdust, mirror image and levitate
Level 4: As above
Level 5: Not even a contest. Ray of exhaustion stops melee from charging, windwall shuts down ranged attacks.

shadow_archmagi

2009-09-04, 06:01 PM

Okay, since this seems to be where the controversy is: I'd like to hear how you think a Wizard/Cleric/Druid/Sorceror (your "optimal" choice) compares to a Fighter/Barbarian/Ranger/Monk/Paladin (again, "optimal" choice) at levels 1-5.

At very low levels it isn't particularly horrible. At fifth level, well, let me put it this way. I just played a fourth level game.

I was playing an Artificer in a cash-starved party. The DM had ruled that my magics were purely arcane because this "magic in purest form" crap did not go well with his fluff/person preference.

So I was playing a crafter/item user in a party with very little access to crafting time/magic items to use.

Fortunately, I noticed I had an Infusion that worked like this:

Spend 1 minute casting a spell.
That spell goes into an item.
Activate that item to release spell.
Can be done with any spell of up to half your caster level.

So basically, I got to cast four 1st or 2nd level spells per day, as long as I prepared them at least one minute in advance, and after five hours they dissipated.

I contributed to every solution (sometimes I was the largest contributor, sometimes not, but I was the only player who was never ever useless)

Yukitsu

2009-09-04, 06:03 PM

Okay, since this seems to be where the controversy is: I'd like to hear how you think a Wizard/Cleric/Druid/Sorceror (your "optimal" choice) compares to a Fighter/Barbarian/Ranger/Monk/Paladin (again, "optimal" choice) at levels 1-5.

A properly optimized wizard level 1 of my choice is something like this

Grey elf conjurer, abrupt jaunt variant, fighter feats instead of wizard feats variant.

Feats would be something like improved initiative and knowledge devotion.

Stats: 8 strength, 14 dexterity, 12 constitution, 20 intelligence, 10 wisdom, 10 charisma (32 PB)

Take a smattering of knowledge skills, spellcraft, concentrate and craft alchemy. For now, one or two ranks in any given knowledges is fine.

Acid thrown does d6+2 damage (average 5.5) and has a +4 to hit, as a touch attack.

Twice per day, you can hit someone with a DC 16 save or die colour spray, and you also get your casting of grease, which can really mess over an enemy enough that you can acid them a few times without fear of reprisal.

5 times per day, when that big scary axe is about to come down on your head, you can simply avoid the attack with your abrupt jaunt.

This build is competetive with your typical fighter of the level, and has a very high chance of beating a fighter of its level. It falls a bit behind at level 2, where it gains far less than a fighter, but rockets ahead at 3 with its 2 castings of glitterdust, and its 2d6 reserve acid splatter. Level 4, you have enough spells known to combo glitterdust and web spells depending on terrain, doing decent, consistant damage with the acid splatters (2d6+2, possibly +3.)

At level 5, you're surrounded by skeletal body guards, do 3d6+3 all day easily, and can ride around for 5 hours per day on a ridiculously fast steed, letting you kite pretty much any encounter you meet to death with your acid splatters.

Aharon

2009-09-04, 06:15 PM

@Zovc
In this thread, (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19864514/Examples_of_overpowered_casters?num=10&pg=1) some caster and non-caster builds compete at 5th and higher levels.
At 5th, the non-caster builds are still somewhat viable. The higher level encounters were exclusively won by casters, as far as I remember (sorry that I don't give specifics, it's a huge thread).

PairO'Dice Lost

2009-09-04, 06:21 PM

Nope. This is only true in internet theory.

If brokenness only originates from the internet...who finds these things and posts them in the first place? Yes, there are many people who can look at spell lists and see what's good and bad; the fact that some people can only figure out good spells by reading someone else's work doesn't negate that.

Yukitsu

2009-09-04, 06:24 PM

Starbuck_II

2009-09-04, 06:38 PM

A summoner as the tank? I'm pretty sure that summoning creatures is a full round action so while they are doing that they are being attacked. And then whatever is summoned disappears after a round, once again leaving the wizards exposed.

No, not really.

Rapid Summoning (Ex)
Any time a conjurer using this variant casts a summon monster spell, its casting time is 1 standard action rather than 1 full round. (Creatures so summoned can only take a standard action in the round they are summoned.) Conjurers using this variant gain the normal benefits from enhancing a summon monster spell with the Quicken Spell feat.

A conjurer using this variant permanently gives up the ability to obtain a familiar.

You can do alot at low levels with a summon. Not much hps on foes.

What kind of damage does a first level conjurer or evoker do? Not nearly as much as a greataxe with a halfway decent STR.

1d8 as a touch attack, 1d6, 1d10, or 1d12 as a ranged touch.
Sure, G.axe deals more but lower chance to hit.

I don't know what a BC is, so maybe you're right.

Battle field control: like Grease.
Very few people have ranks in balance (lose dex to AC) and reflex saves are bad for warrior types.

Plus, they are probably wandering aimlessly through the woods with no ranger to help them. No spot or listen to detect the goblins sneaking up. Plus, people sometimes do make their saves, even Will saves for fighters. So it's not like Color Spray and Sleep are all powerful (they are great, don't get me wrong).

Fighter types have like a 20% chance. You have a better chance of Criticaling in melee with a Scythe at low levels than succeeding on will saves.
And yes, that includes confirmation rolls.

mostlyharmful

2009-09-04, 06:46 PM

Fighter types have like a 20% chance. You have a better chance of Criticaling in melee with a Scythe at low levels than succeeding on will saves.
And yes, that includes confirmation rolls.

Plus I don't know how likely it is for a group of four level 1 wizards party to find themselves out in the woods.

Starbuck_II

2009-09-04, 07:00 PM

Really, the wizards could have cross ranks in wilderness lore (survival whatever).
After all, Wizards use Int so they have great skill points.

Sinfire Titan

2009-09-04, 08:47 PM

3 main things make classes broken:

Munchkin players

Internet theory

Weak/uncreative DMs

Sure some classes are significantly more powerful than others, but usually it's not that the classes are broken.

You would be right, if Wild Shape didn't put an elephant in the room...

:smallamused:

mikej

2009-09-04, 09:13 PM

3 main things make classes broken:

Munchkin players #1

Internet theory #2

Weak/uncreative DMs #3

Explain the reasoning behind these statements a little further.

#1: Munchkin is such a poorly used derogatory word. Most people would not be jerks. Also if a decent player is doing well in core with a Wizard, out performs the Fighter, is that being a Munchkin? I give people a little credit to solve such juvenile things like cheating, stealing loot, trying to be the sole winning of a co-op game and general having a tantrum if things don't go that person's way in a mature fashion.

#2: Soo if a average person look's up some advice to build a cabinet online. Is that cheating trained Cabinet Makers? Noo, some people tend to do research in that particular subject if it's something they'd like to improve on. It's perfertly fine for someone to ask advice on how to play the Druid. It's then the player's choice if he/she follows that advice. Also, as Eldariel mentioned, you need someone to tell you Divine Power and Polymorph are good options? I have never seen anyone I know play any extreme "Internet Theory" stuff in D&D except for the basic Glitterdust is better than blasting etc etc.

#3: Soo it's wrong for the DM to want balanced games. The DM shouldn't be lazy when preparing sessions either but he/she shouldn't spend a lot of afford to make the Fighter's player competent because the game designers screwed up. As for "weak," I didn't know the DM was being judge strong or weak in an recreational dice and paper game? DM's are people too and they make mistakes. If he/she isn't being creative in your view, help out, do the favor and tell the DM how to improve. You're part of the same gaming group and should work together to insure everyone is having fun.

Yahzi

2009-09-04, 09:25 PM

A caster has few spell slots per day.
Until he starts making scrolls and wands.

Psst - wizards make scrolls at level one.

oxinabox

2009-09-04, 09:30 PM

Batman wizard my be insainle effective.
|
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=104002.
But it's more fun to play with (as a melee'er) than a balster.

The fighter feels bad when he sees that the wizard rolld 10d6 damage, against all the enemies. Save for HALF damage.
Then he makes his attacks: 1d8+8, twice. one of which misses for zero damage.

Where as the bat man wizard, mostly just debuffs, and then the fighter beats things to unconsciousness.

or the TWF ranger makes 4 attacks. as a full round action

Then the druid comes along and makes 4 at the end of his charge.
then the druids compainion makes another 4.
and Then the Druid walks through a wall

quick_comment

2009-09-04, 09:43 PM

Until he starts making scrolls and wands.

Psst - wizards make scrolls at level one.

Alchemy is also an in-class skill.

Forevernade

2009-09-04, 10:39 PM

Why not just revert back to the 2.5 XP tables? the one change being war/barb use Rogue tables.

PairO'Dice Lost

2009-09-04, 10:41 PM

You would be right, if Wild Shape didn't put an elephant in the room...

:smallamused:

Nah, it puts a fleshraker in the room, and that's where the fun starts.

Why not just revert back to the 2.5 XP tables? the one change being war/barb use Rogue tables.

Because they don't play well with 3e-style multiclassing.

Sinfire Titan

2009-09-04, 10:48 PM

Why not just revert back to the 2.5 XP tables? the one change being war/barb use Rogue tables.

Because of multiclassing and PrCs not being compatible with it in any way/ There's just too many potential combinations out there to have a table for every possible build in existence.

Chrono22

2009-09-04, 10:51 PM

An inherent lack of understanding on the part of the designers concerning power (and it's scope in the game reality), and the pervasive philosophy that magic can and should do everything better and more easily than mundane methods.

Agrippa

2009-09-04, 11:08 PM

Because they don't play well with 3e-style multiclassing.

Then the DM should require a small but non-negligible amount of training for each additional class. Either that or require that the character in question "spend" (devote a portion of) experience equal to the 2nd level goal to attain that first level or time out of the campaign. Along with of course mandating that the character reach level two in their current class and that the character may only devote one tenth (at high levels) to one half (at low levels) of their experience to learning their new class. So if a second level wizard want's to become a thief, he or she must gain 1,250 experience points to become a first level thief, but doesn't retain the experience. I'm not sure if the problem is solved exactly, but I'd be crazy enough to try it.

Forevernade

2009-09-04, 11:09 PM

But you can just use the tables as 'increment' tables, that way you can multiclass.

eg
level 2 fighter 1250XP
level 2 fighter/ 1 wizard (1250 + 2500 =) 3750XP
level 2 fighter/ 1 wizard/ 1 cleric (1250 + 2500 + 3000 =) 6750XP

Not more than 10 seconds of thinking to put together the xp needed to go up next level. And an increment table could easily be written up.

Fighter/Barb/Rogue/Bard
1250
1250
2500
5000
10,000
20,000
etc...

Wiz/Sorc
2500
2500
5000
10000
20000
etc

or if you want it to be more like the 3.5 system which caps 20 at 190,000, as opposed to 3-something million: when writing the table you just get the 3.5 tables and say 1st level of Wiz/Sorc is a +XPA 3, Druid and Cleric is +XPA 2, where XPA is an Experience Adjustment (as opposed to an LA which inhibits your caster levels by saying you are actually levels ahead).

Forevernade

2009-09-04, 11:33 PM

increment per to go from level below to level gained, as a wizard
2nd 3000
3rd 4000
4th 5000
5th 6000
6th 7000
7th 8000
8th 9000

actual XP needed for pure progression as wiz/sorc
2nd 3000
3rd 7000
4th 12000
5th 18000
6th 25000
7th 33000
8th 42000

Same xp, comparing Pure Core progressions:
2nd level fighter to a 1st level wizard
3rd level fighter to a 2nd level wizard
4th level fighter to a 3nd level wizard
5th level fighter to a 4th level wizard
6th level fighter to a 5th level wizard
7th level fighter to a 6th level wizard
8th level fighter to a 7th level wizard
9th level fighter to a 8th level wizard

Periods of difference in the XP table, there will be a 2 level difference between melee types and wiz/sorc
..and later levels there will be larger gaps, up to a 3 level difference.
Not unfair in my opinion.

Kris Strife

2009-09-04, 11:33 PM

I just thought of a way for a fighter to beat a wizard: Make him disjunction an artifact. :smallamused:

ZeroNumerous

2009-09-04, 11:35 PM

I just thought of a way for a fighter to beat a wizard: Make him disjunction an artifact. :smallamused:

You realize that kills the fighter too, right?

Forevernade

2009-09-04, 11:36 PM

I just thought of a way for a fighter to beat a wizard: Make him disjunction an artifact. :smallamused:

In duels, there is a CONCEPTUAL problem. A fighter has to use his wits to out do a wizard's spells, when in reality the fighter probably has low int, and also the player playing him wants to play a fighter for brutality, not tactics. It should be the wizard who has to outsmart the fighter.

Kris Strife

2009-09-04, 11:38 PM

You realize that kills the fighter too, right?

Its closer than he'd get otherwise. :smalltongue:

Alternatively, have him be an ork. :smallbiggrin:

quick_comment

2009-09-04, 11:45 PM

I just thought of a way for a fighter to beat a wizard: Make him disjunction an artifact. :smallamused:

You realize that the wizard is almost certain to pass the will save to retain his spellcasting, and an optimized wizard is almost certain to defeat whatever entity shows up to be angry about the disjunction?

Jack_Simth

2009-09-05, 12:10 AM

You would be right, if Wild Shape didn't put an elephant in the room...

:smallamused:

Even with Wildshape, it's not the classes themselves that are broken. A party of four poorly-built bards isn't a problem - just throw stuff at them that they can handle while still being a challenge. A party of four optimal full casters isn't a problem - just throw stuff at them that they can handle while still being a challenge. Sure, one's running at -4 CR, the other's running at +4 CR, but either can be accounted for without too much headache by the DM, and everyone gets about the same spotlight time.

What breaks a game is not overpowered classes. It's a wide disparity of power amongst the players. In a party with an optimized Druid, Cleric, and Wizard, the Bard who doesn't know how to build a bard effectively is the broken one... because he's the one off of the power curve of the party, and he's the one that needs to be accounted for. In a party with three bards who don't know how to build characters (what, they wanted to play a rock band and drive around in the mystery mobile), the optimized Druid is the broken one - because he's off the power curve of the rest of the party. It's a game. The broken comes from when someone isn't having fun, and that (mechanically) usually comes from a significant disparity in spotlight time.

Hawriel

2009-09-05, 12:54 AM

Metagaming brakes classes. In particular the wizard.

Milskidasith

2009-09-05, 01:03 AM

I don't think you know what metagaming means. It isn't metagaming for the wizard to know what his spells do... and just knowing what they do, you can realize that "item of at will truestrike is pretty cheap considering people spend their lives devoting themselves to getting that accurate" or "Gating in creatures/becoming a giant creature with more powerful abilities while still being me rocks" isn't metagaming.

Mystic Muse

2009-09-05, 01:04 AM

Chuck Norris doesn't break classes. Classes break Chuck Norris.

see what I did there?:smallwink:

A. too much power. B. too much versatility combined with too much power. (I.E. being useful no matter the situation.) C. low ability dependancy.

nightwyrm

2009-09-05, 01:31 AM

xp stuff

Of course, using the CR system, a character with lower levels gains more xp...one of the benefits of having a dedicated crafter 1 level lower than the rest of the party.

And even a lv 17 or 16 wizard is probably still stronger than a lv 20 fighter...so, yeah...I got nothing.

nightwyrm

2009-09-05, 01:43 AM

Even with Wildshape, it's not the classes themselves that are broken. A party of four poorly-built bards isn't a problem - just throw stuff at them that they can handle while still being a challenge. A party of four optimal full casters isn't a problem - just throw stuff at them that they can handle while still being a challenge. Sure, one's running at -4 CR, the other's running at +4 CR, but either can be accounted for without too much headache by the DM, and everyone gets about the same spotlight time.

What breaks a game is not overpowered classes. It's a wide disparity of power amongst the players. In a party with an optimized Druid, Cleric, and Wizard, the Bard who doesn't know how to build a bard effectively is the broken one... because he's the one off of the power curve of the party, and he's the one that needs to be accounted for. In a party with three bards who don't know how to build characters (what, they wanted to play a rock band and drive around in the mystery mobile), the optimized Druid is the broken one - because he's off the power curve of the rest of the party. It's a game. The broken comes from when someone isn't having fun, and that (mechanically) usually comes from a significant disparity in spotlight time.

I would very much agree with this from a game play stand point. Having characters with the same power level tends to alleviate the problem.

However, there is nothing in the books to inform or even indicate to the DM the nature of this power level discrepancy between the classes. The first indication of this problem to a new DM would probably be something that crops up during game play where everyone had already made their chars with no knowledge of the problem. Creating a bunch of classes with widely varying levels of power with no indication to the players or the DM of this variation is first and foremost a game design problem. A serious one and the one that I actually have an issue with.

It's having the DM plug up a leaking boat. The boat may run after the DM spends time plugging it up and bail water from time to time. Doesn't mean the DM didn't get himself a leaky boat.

Leon

2009-09-05, 06:57 AM

You might be a munchkin if your answer to this question is...

I do.

This.
The classes are not inherently broken, its what people do with them and some classes allow people to do more with them than others.

Boci

2009-09-05, 07:48 AM

This.
The classes are not inherently broken, its what people do with them and some classes allow people to do more with them than others.

But you have to go out of your way to make sure your full caster does not outshine the melee characters in your group.

Telonius

2009-09-05, 08:24 AM

I'm going to turn the OP's question on its head - what makes a class balanced?

- Has something at least semi-useful to do in almost every circumstance.
- Can do something important or interesting that no other class can replicate.

(Note that "useful" is a relative term. If you can do d6 damage when another class does 10d12, it's not useful).

Omegonthesane

2009-09-05, 08:27 AM

I'm going to turn the OP's question on its head - what makes a class balanced?
Dungeonomicon, Tome of Fiends, Tome of Necromancy, Races of War. :smalltongue:

I mean, the Tome Barbarian's "sneak attack without sneaking" feature might LOOK broken, but he's still doing direct damage (sucker) and has to be raging to do it.

Also, the only reason I didn't say "Tome feats only" in the one game I've DMed so far is that the Tome feats aren't at all finished yet. And the [Combat] feats probably ought to be reserved for [Combat] classes.

Also, HP damage should result in actual harm. Like, "You have a gaping hole in your side. Easy but fail-able Will save to cast spells please."

Boci

2009-09-05, 09:15 AM

Dungeonomicon, Tome of Fiends, Tome of Necromancy, Races of War. :smalltongue:

To use official sources, Tome of Battle, Tome of Magic (using online fixes for the shadowcastr and truenamer), Magic of Incarnum, PH 2 and the feats from PH 1.

Then you can use Dread necromancer from Heroes of Horror for the dreadnecromancer.

Alternativly ofcourse you could say everyone has to be one of the big 5 and make sure each player understands how to optomize.

Zipding

2009-09-05, 09:28 AM

Batman wizard is a level 20 that uses Time Stop, Forcecage Cloudkill. If they can't counter, they are dead. Period. Breaking Druids is simply the feat Natural Spell. You wildshape and proceed to cast spells while you're a bear or something like that. Those are the simple ways to break those classes. For Cleric, it is Divine Power Righteous Might, and if non-core is allowed, divine metamagic persist magic vestment along with Divine Power. Fighters are one of the worst classes because all they get is feats, that pales in comparison to wizards or druids who can kill him before he can get an attack in.

Dienekes

2009-09-05, 09:32 AM

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5256.0

Maybe this'll help. Though people have reiterated quite a bit of it already.

Diamondeye

2009-09-05, 09:53 AM

I have played in games were casters have dominated the game from level 1, becuase everyone had equal understanding pof the system, and the catser just happened to have a character concept that went against damaging spells. Without the advantage of greater game knowledge, and the DMs reluctance to have more than 4 encounters a day, there was no way melee was going to be as effective as the caster.

There you have it, folks.

No, having more than 4 encounters per day is not the be-all and end-all, but that right there is a weak DM.

Concealment caused the fighter and paladin to miss with their atatcks, whilst the catser laugh at the wierd concept of needing an attack roll to effect opponents, and so on.

That's an awful lot of concealed opponents

Diamondeye

2009-09-05, 09:58 AM

If brokenness only originates from the internet...who finds these things and posts them in the first place? Yes, there are many people who can look at spell lists and see what's good and bad; the fact that some people can only figure out good spells by reading someone else's work doesn't negate that.

People who sit around looking at spell lists trying to find a "win button" and then post about how wrong it is on the internet.

The reason it's an internet theory thing is that it doesn't happen in real games. There's a DM who should, and in most cases does, come up with creative enemies or situations that prevent the instant-win-button from working, or ouserule something. Internet discussions discuss RAW to have a common basis, but that gave rise to the silly fallacy where the fact that something needs DM intervention proves its broken. That's silly. The entire game is predicated upon the idea that the DM will intervene to prevent these kinds of things.

Then, there's the simple fact that anything "broken" that the PCs can do, NPCs can do to.

Boci

2009-09-05, 10:05 AM

There you have it, folks.

No, having more than 4 encounters per day is not the be-all and end-all, but that right there is a weak DM.

Yes, he was a weak a DM, but not because he was reluctant to have more than 4 encounters. At lower level, the more encounter you have, the more you run the risk of a critical hit dropping a PC. Often it doesn't make sense to have more than three encounters unless the PCs are going out of their way to find trouble. A lot of places just do not have that many monsters. I personally like having around 2-3 encounters per day, but I am lucky it works since in my current low level game, no of my players wanted to be one of the big 5.

And even if you have 5 encounters per day, you still have the first 2 were melee-ers feel useless.

That's an awful lot of concealed opponents

That is just one example of how melee-ers are screwed by something that caster do not evan have to take into account. There are plenty others.

Then, there's the simple fact that anything "broken" that the PCs can do, NPCs can do to.

So your solution to casters outshining melee would be to bring in caster NPCs? Yeah that will really make melee feel better.

mikej

2009-09-05, 10:06 AM

People who sit around looking at spell lists trying to find a "win button" and then post about how wrong it is on the internet.

That could be true in some cases but couldn't stuff just happen because of trial and error in a group. Jim the Wizard player may one day realised that Polymorph is way more effective than spamming Fireball. He doesn't have to spread this across the internet but also didn't get it from there either.

Then, there's the simple fact that anything "broken" that the PCs can do, NPCs can do to.

Of course, that's common sense and one of the most basic tactics. Fight fire with fire.

Jack_Simth

2009-09-05, 10:09 AM

That's an awful lot of concealed opponentsBrush. Tall grass. Blur. Fog. There's lots of ways to get concealment.

So your solution to casters outshining melee would be to bring in caster NPCs? Yeah that will really make melee feel better.
Hence my pointing out that it's a power discrepancy between player characters that's the problem, not the power level of the classes in and of themselves.

Diamondeye

2009-09-05, 10:13 AM

#1: Munchkin is such a poorly used derogatory word. Most people would not be jerks. Also if a decent player is doing well in core with a Wizard, out performs the Fighter, is that being a Munchkin? I give people a little credit to solve such juvenile things like cheating, stealing loot, trying to be the sole winning of a co-op game and general having a tantrum if things don't go that person's way in a mature fashion.

I didn't prioritize these items in any way. Munchkins are actually pretty uncommon. No, the wizard "outperforming" the fighter (which is extremely vague) isn't being a munchkin; it also isn't a problem. It is not a flaw in the system for one class to be more powerful than the others. A munchkin is a player who is trying to beat the DM. There are lots of ways to be a munchkin.

#2: Soo if a average person look's up some advice to build a cabinet online. Is that cheating trained Cabinet Makers? Noo, some people tend to do research in that particular subject if it's something they'd like to improve on. It's perfertly fine for someone to ask advice on how to play the Druid. It's then the player's choice if he/she follows that advice. Also, as Eldariel mentioned, you need someone to tell you Divine Power and Polymorph are good options? I have never seen anyone I know play any extreme "Internet Theory" stuff in D&D except for the basic Glitterdust is better than blasting etc etc.

That has nothing to do with the internet theory I'm talking about. There's nothing wrong with looking up advice online. The internet theory I'm talking about are people who come here with arguments about how "broken" a class is by just listing a few spells and feats and claiming "it always wins!". Maybe in the internet world where everything happens at level 20, or where all encounters always take place under circumstances that allow the "win button", but it doesn't happen in actual games.

#3: Soo it's wrong for the DM to want balanced games. The DM shouldn't be lazy when preparing sessions either but he/she shouldn't spend a lot of afford to make the Fighter's player competent because the game designers screwed up. As for "weak," I didn't know the DM was being judge strong or weak in an recreational dice and paper game? DM's are people too and they make mistakes. If he/she isn't being creative in your view, help out, do the favor and tell the DM how to improve. You're part of the same gaming group and should work together to insure everyone is having fun.

No, it's not wrong for the DM to want anything. However, there's balanced between the characters, and balance between the characters and the world. The fact that one character class is more powerful than another does not make it "broken". In fact, even things like Time Stop aren't broken; you balance that by coming up with opponents that either use the same thing, or make the tactic unfeasible. Most "I win" spells really are pretty limited in area of effect, range, and/or duration.

Moreover, the DM doesn't need to spend a lot of time making the fighter competant.

Finally, yes, the DM can be weak in a game. If players are just clobbering the DM over the head with "well it's RAW so you have to allow it" or something, he's weak and needs to start breaking more rules. If grease
is an insta-win in every level 1 fight, he's uncreative. Every opponent doesn't need to come neatly through the grease AOE.

As for "helping the DM be more creative", just because I'm not toeing the party line on "broken classes" does not mean I need condescending advice on how to act in a game group.

Diamondeye

2009-09-05, 10:15 AM

Brush. Tall grass. Blur. Fog. There's lots of ways to get concealment.

How many opponents have blur in a level 1 campaign?

As for fog and tall grass, at melee range those should not be providing much concealment.

Hence my pointing out that it's a power discrepancy between player characters that's the problem, not the power level of the classes in and of themselves.

Except that it's not. Having classes of different power levels is not a problem.

mostlyharmful

2009-09-05, 10:17 AM

How many opponents have blur in a level 1 campaign?

As for fog and tall grass, at melee range those should not be providing much concealment.

Smoke sticks are pretty common though. As are pyromaniac players. And PCs without lowlight/darkvision and nothing more than an lamp/torch between them and blindness.... etc...

Diamondeye

2009-09-05, 10:18 AM

That could be true in some cases but couldn't stuff just happen because of trial and error in a group. Jim the Wizard player may one day realised that Polymorph is way more effective than spamming Fireball. He doesn't have to spread this across the internet but also didn't get it from there either.

Obviously. The internet, however is where "polymorph is better than fireball" eventually evolves into "fireball is worthless and polymorph is totally broken!"

So far I haven't seen one single argument that any class is broken. I've seen arguments that some spells and one particular feat are overpowered. That's nothing that's a major problem with the design, or outside the realm of the amount of houseruling most DMs do anyhow to fix.

Boci

2009-09-05, 10:23 AM

Obviously. The internet, however is where "polymorph is better than fireball" eventually evolves into "fireball is worthless and polymorph is totally broken!"

So far I haven't seen one single argument that any class is broken. I've seen arguments that some spells and one particular feat are overpowered. That's nothing that's a major problem with the design, or outside the realm of the amount of houseruling most DMs do anyhow to fix.

But spells, and the ability to adapt which ones are available, are the wizard class. What else would be broken about it? The half BAB? Wizards are broken because spells are broken.

Except that it's not. Having classes of different power levels is not a problem.

So you have fun in encounters were your fight is lucky drop 1 hobgoblin, whilst the wizard reliably takes out 2-3? Good for you.

Diamondeye

2009-09-05, 10:24 AM

Yes, he was a weak a DM, but not because he was reluctant to have more than 4 encounters. At lower level, the more encounter you have, the more you run the risk of a critical hit dropping a PC. Often it doesn't make sense to have more than three encounters unless the PCs are going out of their way to find trouble. A lot of places just do not have that many monsters. I personally like having around 2-3 encounters per day, but I am lucky it works since in my current low level game, no of my players wanted to be one of the big 5.

[quote]And even if you have 5 encounters per day, you still have the first 2 were melee-ers feel useless.

I'm not buying that they were useless at all. These "wizard casts, party wins" encounters don't happen very often in actual play. People forget how often the save got made on save-or-X, or how not every enemy was in the AOE, etc.

Regardless, having 2-3 encounters knowing full well that having twice that many could solve problems, isn't a problem with the system.

So your solution to casters outshining melee would be to bring in caster NPCs? Yeah that will really make melee feel better.

It should. Caster NPCs never have their own melee companions or summoned creatures to fight?

If the casters are busy neutralizing each other there's a lot for melee to do.

Diamondeye

2009-09-05, 10:25 AM

But spells, and the ability to adapt which ones are available are the wizard class. What else would be broken about it? The half BAB? Wizards are broken because spells are broken.

False. The spells are not the class. The ability to cast them is, but you can plug in and unplug new spells from the list at will without altering the class at all.

That's like arguing you've altered the fighter class if you start changing the properties of different armor types.

Boci

2009-09-05, 10:30 AM

I'm not buying that they were useless at all. These "wizard casts, party wins" encounters don't happen very often in actual play. People forget how often the save got made on save-or-X,

Hobgoblins have a better chance of failing their will save than being hit by melee. And colour spray targets multiply hobgoblins, a fighter rarely can.

or how not every enemy was in the AOE, etc.

Even if it is just 1 enemy in the AoE, the wizard is still using a more powerful attack than melee. Which is really emberassing, being outclassed by the wizard when he wasn't even using the spell's full potential.

Regardless, having 2-3 encounters knowing full well that having twice that many could solve problems, isn't a problem with the system.

It is a problem with the system if you have to have 4+ encounters per day. As I said, you can have 2-3 encounter per day and fun, but not with the big 5. I think that is a balance issue.

It should. Caster NPCs never have their own melee companions or summoned creatures to fight?

If the casters are busy neutralizing each other there's a lot for melee to do.

Few people counter spell. With NPC caster, it quickly becomes whether the PCs or NPCs win initative. And melee is even more vulnerable to NPC casters than PC casters are.

Boci

2009-09-05, 10:31 AM

False. The spells are not the class. The ability to cast them is, but you can plug in and unplug new spells from the list at will without altering the class at all.

So what? Your going to ban colour spray, sleep, glitterdust, levitate, fly and ray of exhaustion? (Notice how those are all core) And saying the spells are not the class but the ability to cast them is really splitting hairs. It does not change my point.

[QUOTE=Diamondeye;6867149]That's like arguing you've altered the fighter class if you start changing the properties of different armor types.

Not its not. The fighter class is essentially feats (plus full BAB). Change the feats and you have changed the fighter class. The problem is feats are vastly inferior to spells.

mikej

2009-09-05, 10:33 AM

Diamondeye: You should've clarified a little better in your original post ( the one I originally posted first ) about "Internet Theory." Also any wise DM should have set of houserules. I also come from a table group that has a rather decent DM that spreads the spotlight. Soo I'm rather fortunate.

So far I haven't seen one single argument that any class is broken. I've seen arguments that some spells and one particular feat are overpowered. That's nothing that's a major problem with the design, or outside the realm of the amount of houseruling most DMs do anyhow to fix.

Druids? Not going to mention any particular spell of feat but the Druid's Wildshape class feature is fairly strong compared to other PHB's "non-feat & spell" class features. Also a free cohort like companion is pretty decent. Obviously, you can houserule it's effect or install watered down version. It's just between Wildshape and the bonus feats the Fighter gets. I'd rather go with Wildshape. Nothing maybe "broken" in your perspective since that term is used too much to describe what that particular individual finds broken.

Zipding

2009-09-05, 10:38 AM

EleventhHour

2009-09-05, 10:44 AM

No, it's not wrong for the DM to want anything. However, there's balanced between the characters, and balance between the characters and the world. The fact that one character class is more powerful than another does not make it "broken". In fact, even things like Time Stop aren't broken; you balance that by coming up with opponents that either use the same thing, or make the tactic unfeasible. Most "I win" spells really are pretty limited in area of effect, range, and/or duration.

A.) So your responce to having a caster that gets 1d4 rounds of whatever he wants to do, buffing, etc, is to have the enemy do the exact same thing? So, it's just escalation of Wizard Versus Wizard on up the Spells of Mass Destruction list until someone caps out?

B.) And how can you possibly make it unfeasible? It's stopping everything for those rounds, you can't really counter him while the caster does things in Time Stop.

They're called 'I win' buttons for a reason, the majority of them tend to be avaible for victory in any situation, and if one so happens to be inert, then you can switch to another. The only way to deny some of them is not to let them level up. And after a short bit of that, I think a player would be aggravated that your not letting them do anything with the XP thier working to get, while everyone else continues on thier normal development.

1.) Sure, maybe some of the creatures don't get covered by the AoE, or succeed in the Save-or-X, but then the Wizard can just do it again. Spells/day tend to give you enough to deal with whatever's coming up unless your DM plans on stacking encounter after encounter without a rest period.

2.) Changing a Fighter's armour type isn't as drastic as going from a half-progression BAB to a Hydra, though. And the Fighter would have to have the ability to instantly change armour types with a standard action, since the Wizard can stop being a Hydra on a dime (Spell, could even be a Quickened one.), and go back to casting.

3.) Arguing that Wiz/Sor isn't broken just because the spells are broken is like arguing that the Fighter didn't have to pick the Longsword over the Shortsword. They have something better available, most likely it's going to be used in any sort of powergaming atmosphere.

Does this mean it's going to happen in a normal game? No. Because the majority of people are decent folks, and enjoy seeing everyone have fun.

Boci

2009-09-05, 10:45 AM

Diamondeye, you say no class is broken? Okay, here is an example, say there is a barbarian facing 4 hobgoblins, he will most likely win, but he will take damage. Now pit those four hobgoblins on 1 level 1 wizard, the wizard will use one of the save or die spells like colour spray or sleep, then going around coup de graceing all of the hobgoblins with no damage taken at all. That is why spellcasters are broken, no matter how hard you try, melee fighters of any sort can and will not be able to catch up to spellcasters of the same level at higher levels.

Lets break this down a bit further.
half ork / barbarian 1. Whilst raging, Strength 14, feat power attack. Whilst raging he +5 to hit, dealing 1d12+6 damage, with the option of changing that to +4, 1d12+8. At beast, it is going to take him 4 rounds to kill every hobgoblin. But he only have a 50% chance of hitting one each round (or 60% if he charges). (Lets assume the player is smart and knows he does not need to power attack)

Elf / wizard 1. Int 14. DC to resist colour spray is 13. Hobolings need a 14 to pass it, so there is a reasonably chance they will all fail, if they are in the area (each one has a 65% chance of dying). The barbarian could never hope to do this.

And to top it all? The wizard can cast colour spray more times per day than the barbarian can rage. And the wizard being sad and the barbarian mad, it is quite possible the wizard has a higher int than the barbarian has strength.

HailDiscordia

2009-09-05, 11:13 AM

Lets break this down a bit further.
half ork / barbarian 1. Whilst raging, Strength 14, feat power attack. Whilst raging he +5 to hit, dealing 1d12+6 damage, with the option of changing that to +4, 1d12+8. At beast, it is going to take him 4 rounds to kill every hobgoblin. But he only have a 50% chance of hitting one each round (or 60% if he charges). (Lets assume the player is smart and knows he does not need to power attack)

Elf / wizard 1. Int 14. DC to resist colour spray is 13. Hobolings need a 14 to pass it, so there is a reasonably chance they will all fail, if they are in the area (each one has a 65% chance of dying). The barbarian could never hope to do this.

And to top it all? The wizard can cast colour spray more times per day than the barbarian can rage. And the wizard being sad and the barbarian mad, it is quite possible the wizard has a higher int than the barbarian has strength.

Yes, but what if the hobgoblins do not all approach in a cone shaped formation? Say they charge the wizard from three or four different directions. Even if the wizard takes out two of them he still has to deal with two charging hobgoblins coming at him. Chances are his AC is 15 or 16 at best (and there is a good chance that it will be lower, with the one hour duration of mage armor).

The barbarian on the other hand can take a shot or two and stands a chance. Especially is he has the much maligned cleave, he has a chance at taking out two in a round.

I guess the point is that non casters are not the worst thing in the world. In all the games I play I've never seen anyone feel so marginalized by playing a fighter that the game was not fun for them. And really this save or die, instant death at 1st level is just nonsense. It really makes me think people are not actually playing D&D.

Boci

2009-09-05, 11:22 AM

Yes, but what if the hobgoblins do not all approach in a cone shaped formation? Say they charge the wizard from three or four different directions.

How? They just suddnely pop up on all four sides? Usually when traveling in a group, people also attacklike that. They like being close together, since it makes them feel more safe then if they attacked from multiple sides, even if the latter is strategically superior.

And really this save or die, instant death at 1st level is just nonsense. It really makes me think people are not actually playing D&D.

It didn't say the wizard was going to end the battle in one round, but he could. The barbarian cannot, ever. What do you mean its nonsense? Its in the book. Save or die.

BobVosh

2009-09-05, 11:23 AM

But there is several spells that end up being save or die at level 1. Color spray, sleep, and grease.

Even if they all come from different directions you can almost always run and then they are are all coming from the same direction. Ready a color spray/whatever.

Philistine

2009-09-05, 11:29 AM

Interesting that virtually all the discussion so far has been of classes "breaking the game" at the high end of the power spectrum. Low-end classes like the Fighter break the game too, but in the opposite direction.

Even if the DM brings in NPC casters to counter the party Wizard and Druid, with the result that both sides' magic users cancel each other out, the party Fighter is likely to be out-done at his one and only area of competency - smacking things with sharp and/or heavy objects - by creatures (summoned or otherwise) whose AB and damage scale faster than the Fighter's AC and HP, and whose AC and HP scale faster than the Fighter's AB and damage. Not to mention anything that flies, or hides, or has DR, or any of the other tricks that screw over mundane melee types. Or any of the many creatures who are effectively or entirely immune to the "tricks" the Fighter can specialize in via feats, like Bull Rush/Grappling/Tripping (larger and/or four-legged creatures, or, you know, fliers) or Disarming/Sundering (go go natural weapons). Worse, a lot of things that utterly negate Fighters are in Core. See Monster Manual 1, as well as the Cleric, Druid, and Sorc/Wiz spell lists in the PHB; it doesn't get any more "Core" than that.

Sadly, even with the aid of "internet theorycraft" and massive splatbook usage to squeeze every last bit of effectiveness out of the class, Fighters end up as one-trick-ponies at best, useless anytime the situation doesn't call for (or allow) their one trick, whether that trick is Insane AoO Tripfests or Crazy Damage-Multiplying Charges. The end result is that a Fighter deprived of caster support - as in the case where "the casters are busy neutralizing each other" - is going to be regularly outclassed at his own role, the one and only thing he can do at all; it doesn't get any more "broken" than that.

Boci

2009-09-05, 11:33 AM

SparkMandriller

2009-09-05, 11:42 AM

Well, they cancel each other out in my games. I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that the entire world plays the same way I do.

tribble

2009-09-05, 11:47 AM

um... color spray, that's a cantrip, then? yes? uh... ok...

isn't it a random effect?

Boci

2009-09-05, 11:49 AM

um... color spray, that's a cantrip, then? yes? uh... ok...

isn't it a random effect?

Assuming your not being sarcastic, no its a 1st level spell that will knock most creatures a 1st level wizard faces unconcious on a failed will save. Prismatic spray is a random affect, but that comes a lot latter.

Leon

2009-09-05, 11:51 AM

But you have to go out of your way to make sure your full caster does not outshine the melee characters in your group.

No you don't.

Starbuck_II

2009-09-05, 11:53 AM

Colorspray: Conditions of unconscious, blinded, and stunned.

Philistine

2009-09-05, 12:19 PM

Making matters worse is the resource disparity. When casters run out of their daily resource (spells), they run away. When fighters run out of their daily resource (hit points), they're dead. To add insult to injury, casters recover all their spells after a single night's rest; a badly-injured Fighter will need days of complete bed rest to get back up to strength.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 12:25 PM

I wonder how long it would be before one of these threads came up again...:smallbiggrin:

Frankly, I guess the perception that the 3.5 core game is broken/unbalanced towards uber casters is due to the following (which has also in part been brought up):

1. Interpretation of what spells really do
Solid Fog? First level commoner just takes 4x move and is out of the area (thanks btw for providing complete concealment from your spells, wizard!:smallsmile:)
Force Cage/Cloudkill? At the levels these come up, the non-caster gets out his cheap rod of cancellation and moves out, or blinks/dimensionsdoors out, or is immune to poison anyhow.
Sure. You CAN interpret, for instance, a planar binding spell that a caster gets an infinite number of utterly loyal outsiders that do 9th-level spells for him whenever he likes to, all without any consequences from either the other players or npcs.
However, it can also easily be interpreted as really "dangerous" (as suggested in the spell description). After all, all the spells do is get unwilling (often utterly evil) npcs do services for you. And npcs are run by the DM. As is the knowledge available by the casters about outsiders or other creatures in the first place (see knowledge skill description).
So what we have here is a broken game when the DM lets it run this way, but the way the game is intended, it is not broken.

2. Disadvantages for and threats to casters
In quite a few games, I have seen wizards in the party running around even at higher levels with awful AC and hps. Guess what happens? Strangely, opponents never attack those wizards (because the DM knows the wizard will get wiped out immediately). Result: wizard players believe they are uber and always have the right spells since they never are in any danger.
Also, whenever the casters run out of spells, the group retreats (which is a wise thing), but the DM lets them without problems (which is an odd thing). Result: who needs the spells/day restriction? Casters do not need worry. And (permanent) feats really are underpowered...:smallamused: (similarly, casters NEVER will have to worry about losing their casting ability -although many caster class descriptions provide rules on this - or that they are attacked when they /before they try to relearn the spells).

3. Underestimation of what non-casters can do vs casters
My views on these are fairly well known (check out my sig for the monk example). There are so many ways, with mundane or magic equipment, with class abilities or good ideas, to thwart enemy spellcasting - it is fascinating that it hardly seems to play a role anywhere.

4. Misperceptions of what a group game is about
Casters can do their great reality-breaking stuff ("magic") at most levels because the non-casters are around to protect them.
There is, however, a strange tendency sometimes to call non-casters thus helping the casters in the group "stupid fighters/meatshields/whathaveyou", but casters helping the non-casters with buffs is called "leeching power off casters".
This is not what the game is about, imo, though.
If a wizard shines in one encounter with a great area effect or debuff, he should not proclaim his uberage and think the group rogue or fighter "2nd tier class" because they "only" mop up the debuffed enemy. In the 7th encounter of the day, when the wizard is reduced to casting some lower-level spells he is the one to finish the enemy with a magic missile after the barbarian did 90 damage to him in the round before.

- Giacomo

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-05, 12:34 PM

1. Interpretation of what spells really do
Solid Fog? First level commoner just takes 4x move and is out of the area (thanks btw for providing complete concealment from your spells, wizard!:smallsmile:)
You can't run without seeing where you are going.

Force Cage/Cloudkill? At the levels these come up, the non-caster gets out his cheap rod of cancellation and moves out, or blinks/dimensionsdoors out, or is immune to poison anyhow.
Incorrect: you can't blink out, Forcecage prevents that.

And DD is only available to Monks at level 12 1/day or Horizonwalkers at level 11 every 1d4 rounds.

Sure. You CAN interpret, for instance, a planar binding spell that a caster gets an infinite number of utterly loyal outsiders that do 9th-level spells for him whenever he likes to, all without any consequences from either the other players or npcs.
I'm sure someone smarter than the smartest human being ever to have lived can find a way of negotiate his way into getting multiple minions on his side with minimal risk.

However, it can also easily be interpreted as really "dangerous" (as suggested in the spell description). After all, all the spells do is get unwilling (often utterly evil) npcs do services for you. And npcs are run by the DM. As is the knowledge available by the casters about outsiders or other creatures in the first place (see knowledge skill description).
Hire neutrals or good monsters. Problem solved.

2. Disadvantages for and threats to casters
In quite a few games, I have seen wizards in the party running around even at higher levels with awful AC and hps. Guess what happens? Strangely, opponents never attack those wizards (because the DM knows the wizard will get wiped out immediately). Result: wizard players believe they are uber and always have the right spells since they never are in any danger.

Jaya's died once so far in our little dungeoncrawl. Gladiator's died twice, and been subverted to the enemy once. And I don't think you're going to argue that Jaya hasn't been getting attacked by enemies on a constant basis.

Also, whenever the casters run out of spells, the group retreats (which is a wise thing), but the DM lets them without problems (which is an odd thing). Result: who needs the spells/day restriction? Casters do not need worry. And (permanent) feats really are underpowered...:smallamused: (similarly, casters NEVER will have to worry about losing their casting ability -although many caster class descriptions provide rules on this - or that they are attacked when they /before they try to relearn the spells).
Saph hardly lets us off easy, and I'm still doing much better than your monk or the Rogue.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 12:47 PM

You can't run without seeing where you are going.

But you can see where you are going in a solid fog, since within 5ft it is only concealment effect.

You can't blink out, Forcecage prevents that. DD is only available to Monks at level 12 1/day or Horizonwalkers at level 11 every 1d4 rounds.

Ah, forgot the force effect stops blinking - so we're down out of - how many possiblities to escape from this alleged "100% safe anti-non-caster combo"?:smallsmile: And DD is available to all adventurers via magic items.

I'm sure someone smarter than the smartest human being ever to have lived can find a way of getting multiple minions on his side with minimal risk.

I'm also sure. But a minimal risk is still a risk. And intelligence alone is not enough to get evil npcs on your side.

Hire neutrals or good monsters.

Leaving still almost everything up to the DM. Hey I'm not saying it cannot be done. But if a DM wants a game like this, people should not complain about brokenness.

Jaya's died once. Gladiator's died twice, and been subverted to the enemy once. And I don't think you're going to argue that Jaya hasn't been getting attacked by enemies on a constant basis.
Saph hardly lets us off easy, and I'm still doing much better than your monk or the Rogue.

What does this playtest have to do with my general remarks and experiences so far? I cannot even comment on that one yet, since it is still in the beginning stages (in the midst of the 3rd encounter). Please do not bring it up here.

- Giacomo

quick_comment

2009-09-05, 12:48 PM

You can't run without seeing where you are going.

Incorrect: you can't blink out, Forcecage prevents that.

And DD is only available to Monks at level 12 1/day or Horizonwalkers at level 11 every 1d4 rounds.

Not to mention that using dimension door also trips the wizards anticipate teleport, and he gets to forcecage you again.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 12:52 PM

Not to mention that using dimension door also trips the wizards anticipate teleport, and he gets to forcecage you again.

At which point you are in non-core territory and can do even more to get out of the forcecage.
Plus, you do not need to dimension door out close to the wizard (would be a bit odd, since you can't do anything afterwards).
Plus, probably the best way is to simply use a rod of cancellation.

- Giacomo

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-05, 12:54 PM

But you can see where you are going in a solid fog, since within 5ft it is only concealment effect.
Only within 5 feet, though. You did not mention this: you just made a blanket statement.

Ah, forgot the force effect stops blinking - so we're down out of - how many possiblities to escape from this alleged "100% safe anti-non-caster combo"?:smallsmile: And DD is available to all adventurers via magic items.
Note that you cannot take actions after DD, so you get slapped with another Forcecage or what have you again.

What does this playtest have to do with my general remarks and experiences so far?
It was designed to see if your comments held water or not.

I cannot even comment on that one yet, since it is still in the beginning stages (in the midst of the 3rd encounter). Please do not bring it up here.
Asking people to not bring up points that counter your statements is a sign of weakness.

SparkMandriller

2009-09-05, 12:54 PM

Yeah, because arguing with Giacomo? Totally gonna produce results!

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-05, 12:58 PM

At which point you are in non-core territory and can do even more to get out of the forcecage.
Plus, you do not need to dimension door out close to the wizard (would be a bit odd, since you can't do anything afterwards).
Plus, probably the best way is to simply use a rod of cancellation.

- Giacomo

Rod of Cancellation: 11,000 gp.

Note: You'd need it at level 9 onwards, when wizards get things like Wall of Force.

It's not cheap at 9-12 ish, iirc.

At higher levels, having a few around will not be expensive, but spell slots come back every day, whereas the Rods will have to be purchased at a high level magic store.

shadow_archmagi

2009-09-05, 01:03 PM

But you can see where you are going in a solid fog, since within 5ft it is only concealment effect.

I believe "Solid Fog" does not allow taking a x4 movement. It's an interpretation thing, but "In a solid fog you may only move five feet" seems to say that five feet is an absolute limit.

As for

"not all situations will allow for "I win" buttons"

That's why you have a pile of them, and why you pick ones that will crop up a lot. For example, a *lot* of enemies have eyes. Blindness is applicable to all of them. Sure, the occasional NPC might have a Blindfold of True Darkness to see with, but that is hardly going to happen on a regular basis. Between Reflex, Will, Fortitude, and Touch AC, it is quite hard to protect yourself from everything.

What does this playtest have to do with my general remarks and experiences so far? I cannot even comment on that one yet, since it is still in the beginning stages (in the midst of the 3rd encounter). Please do not bring it up here.

A well-documented playtest in which a party of competent players who understand the rules pick both casters and noncasters seems like a terrific thing to use as an example.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 01:05 PM

Only within 5 feet, though. You did not mention this: you just made a blanket statement.

?

Note that you cannot take actions after DD, so you get slapped with another Forcecage or what have you again.

Which is why you should DD out of wizard range (for instance, somewhere where he has no line of effect).

It was designed to see if your comments held water or not.
Asking people to not bring up points that counter your statements is a sign of weakness.

I'll have to live with that for now, I guess. *shrugs*

- Giacomo

quick_comment

2009-09-05, 01:07 PM

You cant run out of a solid fog. It does not say 5ft per move action. It says 5ft per round.

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-05, 01:12 PM

?
"You can run out of a Solid Fog" is a general statement. When the actual situation is "You can only run out of the Solid Fog if you are within 5 feet of the edge", you can be said to have made a misstatement.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 01:13 PM

I believe "Solid Fog" does not allow taking a x4 movement. It's an interpretation thing, but "In a solid fog you may only move five feet" seems to say that five feet is an absolute limit.

Thank you- this is a wonderful example of my first point!
You see, the spell does not say "in a solid fog you may only move five feet", but it says (from SRD): "...the solid fog is so thick that any creature attempting to move through it progresses at a speed of 5 feet...". You see? It is a SPEED of 5 ft (instead of your normal, say, 30ft speed). And you can always opt to move 4x your normal speed in a turn (except in difficult terrain or when you cannot see).
With just a bit of wrong interpretation, a spell goes from "highly useful, but not outlandish compared to what 7th level pcs can do" too "very powerful".

As for

"not all situations will allow for "I win" buttons"

That's why you have a pile of them, and why you pick ones that will crop up a lot. For example, a *lot* of enemies have eyes. Blindness is applicable to all of them. Sure, the occasional NPC might have a Blindfold of True Darkness to see with, but that is hardly going to happen on a regular basis. Between Reflex, Will, Fortitude, and Touch AC, it is quite hard to protect yourself from everything.

But an enemy will also have possiblities to do blind your caster as well (even the non-casters and yes, even without magic). The wizard does not have a pile of win buttons, only a lot of good options - just like everyone else.

A well-documented playtest in which a party of competent players who understand the rules pick both casters and noncasters seems like a terrific thing to use as an example.

But we have just begun it (basically, in the midst of the third encounter). That's why I do not use it yet as a basis for my general remarks.

- Giacomo

Doc Roc

2009-09-05, 01:20 PM

I do generally load one into my emergency lance.

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-05, 01:21 PM

You see, the spell does not say "in a solid fog you may only move five feet", but it says (from SRD): "...the solid fog is so thick that any creature attempting to move through it progresses at a speed of 5 feet...". You see? It is a SPEED of 5 ft (instead of your normal, say, 30ft speed). And you can always opt to move 4x your normal speed in a turn (except in difficult terrain or when you cannot see).

Solid Fog: Blocks vision and slows movement.

Conjuration (Creation)
Level: Sor/Wiz 4
Components: V, S, M
Duration: 1 min./level
Spell Resistance: No
This spell functions like fog cloud, but in addition to obscuring sight, the solid fog is so thick that any creature attempting to move through it progresses at a speed of 5 feet, regardless of its normal speed, and it takes a -2 penalty on all melee attack and melee damage rolls. The vapors prevent effective ranged weapon attacks (except for magic rays and the like). A creature or object that falls into solid fog is slowed, so that each 10 feet of vapor that it passes through reduces falling damage by 1d6. A creature can’t take a 5-foot step while in solid fog.

However, unlike normal fog, only a severe wind (31+ mph) disperses these vapors, and it does so in 1 round.

Solid fog can be made permanent with a permanency spell. A permanent solid fog dispersed by wind reforms in 10 minutes.

Material Component
A pinch of dried, powdered peas combined with powdered animal hoof.

Fog Cloud
Conjuration (Creation)
Level: Drd 2, Sor/Wiz 2, Water 2
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft. level)
Effect: Fog spreads in 20-ft. radius, 20 ft. high
Duration: 10 min./level
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No
A bank of fog billows out from the point you designate. The fog obscures all sight, including darkvision, beyond 5 feet. A creature within 5 feet has concealment (attacks have a 20% miss chance). Creatures farther away have total concealment (50% miss chance, and the attacker can’t use sight to locate the target).

A moderate wind (11+ mph) disperses the fog in 4 rounds; a strong wind (21+ mph) disperses the fog in 1 round.

The spell does not function underwater.

Go on.

Boci

2009-09-05, 01:41 PM

No you don't.

Yes you do.

See how well I countered your argument? No, I didn't either. I've provide many examples of what a caster can do with spells that melee never can. You have provided nothing to back up your statement.

1. Interpretation of what spells really do
Solid Fog? First level commoner just takes 4x move and is out of the area (thanks btw for providing complete concealment from your spells, wizard!:smallsmile:)
Force Cage/Cloudkill? At the levels these come up, the non-caster gets out his cheap rod of cancellation and moves out, or blinks/dimensionsdoors out, or is immune to poison anyhow.
Sure. You CAN interpret, for instance, a planar binding spell that a caster gets an infinite number of utterly loyal outsiders that do 9th-level spells for him whenever he likes to, all without any consequences from either the other players or npcs.
However, it can also easily be interpreted as really "dangerous" (as suggested in the spell description). After all, all the spells do is get unwilling (often utterly evil) npcs do services for you. And npcs are run by the DM. As is the knowledge available by the casters about outsiders or other creatures in the first place (see knowledge skill description).
So what we have here is a broken game when the DM lets it run this way, but the way the game is intended, it is not broken.

Colour spray? Grease? Levitate? Glitter dust? Ray of exhaustion? At higher levels waves of exhaustion? Also, this isn't a PvP. Sure the fighter can get a rod of cancelation. What about monsters?

2. Disadvantages for and threats to casters
In quite a few games, I have seen wizards in the party running around even at higher levels with awful AC and hps. Guess what happens? Strangely, opponents never attack those wizards (because the DM knows the wizard will get wiped out immediately). Result: wizard players believe they are uber and always have the right spells since they never are in any danger.
Also, whenever the casters run out of spells, the group retreats (which is a wise thing), but the DM lets them without problems (which is an odd thing). Result: who needs the spells/day restriction? Casters do not need worry. And (permanent) feats really are underpowered...:smallamused: (similarly, casters NEVER will have to worry about losing their casting ability -although many caster class descriptions provide rules on this - or that they are attacked when they /before they try to relearn the spells).

At higher levels, continguicy is the obvious spell here, but there are other ways as well that a caster can ensure they can get their defenses in the moment of need. But anyway, protecting a caster is not what I call fun.

3. Underestimation of what non-casters can do vs casters
My views on these are fairly well known (check out my sig for the monk example). There are so many ways, with mundane or magic equipment, with class abilities or good ideas, to thwart enemy spellcasting - it is fascinating that it hardly seems to play a role anywhere.

Again, this is not PvP. It doesn't matter if you can beat me. You need to be able to beat the monsters that are trying to kill us.

4. Misperceptions of what a group game is about
Casters can do their great reality-breaking stuff ("magic") at most levels because the non-casters are around to protect them.
There is, however, a strange tendency sometimes to call non-casters thus helping the casters in the group "stupid fighters/meatshields/whathaveyou", but casters helping the non-casters with buffs is called "leeching power off casters".
This is not what the game is about, imo, though.
If a wizard shines in one encounter with a great area effect or debuff, he should not proclaim his uberage and think the group rogue or fighter "2nd tier class" because they "only" mop up the debuffed enemy. In the 7th encounter of the day, when the wizard is reduced to casting some lower-level spells he is the one to finish the enemy with a magic missile after the barbarian did 90 damage to him in the round before.

But if there was a 7th encounter in the day, there was also a 1st and second. Just becaise there is a 1st and second dopes not mean there will be a 7th. How many of your games have 7 encounter a day?

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 01:46 PM

Go on.

Fog Cloud
Conjuration (Creation)
Level: Drd 2, Sor/Wiz 2, Water 2
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft. level)
Effect: Fog spreads in 20-ft. radius, 20 ft. high
Duration: 10 min./level
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No
A bank of fog billows out from the point you designate. The fog obscures all sight, including darkvision, beyond 5 feet. A creature within 5 feet has concealment (attacks have a 20% miss chance). Creatures farther away have total concealment (50% miss chance, and the attacker can’t use sight to locate the target).

A moderate wind (11+ mph) disperses the fog in 4 rounds; a strong wind (21+ mph) disperses the fog in 1 round.

The spell does not function underwater.

Your move :smallsmile:

- Giacomo

Edit: I guess I do not have to explain the difference between concealment and total concealment, do I?:smallsmile: For instance, a caster can still see enough to target opponents. Enough for running, I daresay ...

Sinfire Titan

2009-09-05, 01:48 PM

No you don't.

Tell me something: Can fighters fly under their own power before level 5 without using a race that has a level adjustment? Because Wizards can do that at level 3 (Levitate, Alter Self).

I've just singlehanded proved you wrong. The Wizard starts outshining the Fighter at level 3 by being able to do something he can't do under his own power. That's the tip of the iceberg.

quick_comment

2009-09-05, 01:49 PM

You can run as a full-round action. (If you do, you do not also get a 5-foot step.) When you run, you can move up to four times your speed in a straight line (or three times your speed if you’re in heavy armor). You lose any Dexterity bonus to AC unless you have the Run feat

the solid fog is so thick that any creature attempting to move through it progresses at a speed of 5 feet, regardless of its normal speed,

Specific trumps general. Running through the fog lets you move at 5ft, and you also lose dex to AC.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 01:49 PM

Tell me something: Can fighters fly under their own power before level 5 without using a race that has a level adjustment? Because Wizards can do that at level 3 (Levitate, Alter Self).

I've just singlehanded proved you wrong. The Wizard starts outshining the Fighter at level 3 by being able to do something he can't do under his own power. That's the tip of the iceberg.

Wizard: "Look, I can fly, you puny fighter. And we're only level 3!"
Fighter, shrugs, rapid shoots wizard from the sky.

:smallbiggrin:

- Giacomo

Boci

2009-09-05, 01:52 PM

Wizard: "Look, I can fly, you puny fighter. And we're only level 3!"
Fighter, shrugs, rapid shoots wizard from the sky.

:smallbiggrin:

- Giacomo

Too bad that was just an illusion. The real wizard is somewhere nearby invisible.

1. Interpretation of what spells really do
Solid Fog? First level commoner just takes 4x move and is out of the area (thanks btw for providing complete concealment from your spells, wizard!:smallsmile:)
Force Cage/Cloudkill? At the levels these come up, the non-caster gets out his cheap rod of cancellation and moves out, or blinks/dimensionsdoors out, or is immune to poison anyhow.
Sure. You CAN interpret, for instance, a planar binding spell that a caster gets an infinite number of utterly loyal outsiders that do 9th-level spells for him whenever he likes to, all without any consequences from either the other players or npcs.
However, it can also easily be interpreted as really "dangerous" (as suggested in the spell description). After all, all the spells do is get unwilling (often utterly evil) npcs do services for you. And npcs are run by the DM. As is the knowledge available by the casters about outsiders or other creatures in the first place (see knowledge skill description).
So what we have here is a broken game when the DM lets it run this way, but the way the game is intended, it is not broken.

Colour spray? Grease? Levitate? Glitter dust? Ray of exhaustion? At higher levels waves of exhaustion? Also, this isn't a PvP. Sure the fighter can get a rod of cancelation. What about monsters?

2. Disadvantages for and threats to casters
In quite a few games, I have seen wizards in the party running around even at higher levels with awful AC and hps. Guess what happens? Strangely, opponents never attack those wizards (because the DM knows the wizard will get wiped out immediately). Result: wizard players believe they are uber and always have the right spells since they never are in any danger.
Also, whenever the casters run out of spells, the group retreats (which is a wise thing), but the DM lets them without problems (which is an odd thing). Result: who needs the spells/day restriction? Casters do not need worry. And (permanent) feats really are underpowered...:smallamused: (similarly, casters NEVER will have to worry about losing their casting ability -although many caster class descriptions provide rules on this - or that they are attacked when they /before they try to relearn the spells).

At higher levels, continguicy is the obvious spell here, but there are other ways as well that a caster can ensure they can get their defenses in the moment of need. But anyway, protecting a caster is not what I call fun.

3. Underestimation of what non-casters can do vs casters
My views on these are fairly well known (check out my sig for the monk example). There are so many ways, with mundane or magic equipment, with class abilities or good ideas, to thwart enemy spellcasting - it is fascinating that it hardly seems to play a role anywhere.

Again, this is not PvP. It doesn't matter if you can beat me. You need to be able to beat the monsters that are trying to kill us.

4. Misperceptions of what a group game is about
Casters can do their great reality-breaking stuff ("magic") at most levels because the non-casters are around to protect them.
There is, however, a strange tendency sometimes to call non-casters thus helping the casters in the group "stupid fighters/meatshields/whathaveyou", but casters helping the non-casters with buffs is called "leeching power off casters".
This is not what the game is about, imo, though.
If a wizard shines in one encounter with a great area effect or debuff, he should not proclaim his uberage and think the group rogue or fighter "2nd tier class" because they "only" mop up the debuffed enemy. In the 7th encounter of the day, when the wizard is reduced to casting some lower-level spells he is the one to finish the enemy with a magic missile after the barbarian did 90 damage to him in the round before.

But if there was a 7th encounter in the day, there was also a 1st and second. Just becaise there is a 1st and second dopes not mean there will be a 7th. How many of your games have 7 encounter a day?

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-05, 01:53 PM

Wizard: "Look, I can fly, you puny fighter. And we're only level 3!"
Fighter, shrugs, rapid shoots wizard from the sky.

:smallbiggrin:

- Giacomo

Rapid Shot [General]
Prerequisites
Dex 13, Point Blank Shot.

Benefit
You can get one extra attack per round with a ranged weapon. The attack is at your highest base attack bonus, but each attack you make in that round (the extra one and the normal ones) takes a -2 penalty. You must use the full attack action to use this feat.

Special
A fighter may select Rapid Shot as one of his fighter bonus feats.

A 2nd-level ranger who has chosen the archery combat style is treated as having Rapid Shot, even if he does not have the prerequisites for it, but only when he is wearing light or no armor.

Two feat investments and Dex focused instead of Strength focused. Evidently we do not have a melee fighter here.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 01:53 PM

Specific trumps general. Running through the fog lets you move at 5ft, and you also lose dex to AC.

no specific trumps nothing here.
PHB, p. 312 (can't find it in the SRD right now): "speed: the number of feet a creature can move when taking a move action."

solid fog oes not let you "move at 5ft", but reduces your SPEED to 5ft. Pls look up the spell again.
And losing DEX to AC is really not a big issue when you have concealment vs all sneak attacks :smallwink:

- Giacomo

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-05, 01:54 PM

Giacomo, Sinfire's example was to show things the wizard can do that the fighter can't. How does your archery example add to the discussion?

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-05, 01:56 PM

solid fog oes not let you "move at 5ft", but reduces your SPEED to 5ft. Pls look up the spell again.

The specific line is "the solid fog is so thick that any creature attempting to move through it progresses at a speed of 5 feet". Not "reduces to 5 ft".

Boci

2009-09-05, 01:57 PM

no specific trumps nothing here.
PHB, p. 312 (can't find it in the SRD right now): "speed: the number of feet a creature can move when taking a move action."

solid fog oes not let you "move at 5ft", but reduces your SPEED to 5ft. Pls look up the spell again.
And losing DEX to AC is really not a big issue when you have concealment vs all sneak attacks :smallwink:

- Giacomo

Yes but it also says "any attempt to move through it". Some DMs may think run falls under the "any attempt" thing.

+ what Pharaoh's Fist said.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 01:58 PM

Too bad that was just an illusion. The real wizard is somewhere nearby invisible.

Oh nos! You mean the 3rd level wizard just used up two spells to the fighter's two arrows? And what is the wizard now going to do? And how come the fighter did not hear the wizard casting the silent/minor image spell? Many questions... all not pointing towards the direction of "brokenland" :smallsmile:

Colour spray? Grease? Levitate? Glitter dust? Ray of exhaustion? At higher levels waves of exhaustion? Also, this isn't a PvP. Sure the fighter can get a rod of cancelation. What about monsters?

Monsters will be likely defeated by wizard spells. This is what the game is a bout. The pcs have a good chance vs the monsters they face. They are the heroes.

At higher levels, continguicy is the obvious spell here, but there are other ways as well that a caster can ensure they can get their defenses in the moment of need. But anyway, protecting a caster is not what I call fun.

Why should that not be fun? Depends on what role you wish to play.

Again, this is not PvP. It doesn't matter if you can beat me. You need to be able to beat the monsters that are trying to kill us.

But all non-casters in core can do that. ?? I do not see any problem here. As can the casters. It is up to individual maxing fu and DM style only how powerful they are doing that.

But if there was a 7th encounter in the day, there was also a 1st and second. Just becaise there is a 1st and second dopes not mean there will be a 7th. How many of your games have 7 encounter a day?

How many of your games have 3 and less encounters a day?

- Giacomo

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 02:00 PM

sorry, double post

Yukitsu

2009-09-05, 02:03 PM

[B]Sure. You CAN interpret, for instance, a planar binding spell that a caster gets an infinite number of utterly loyal outsiders that do 9th-level spells for him whenever he likes to, all without any consequences from either the other players or npcs.
However, it can also easily be interpreted as really "dangerous" (as suggested in the spell description). After all, all the spells do is get unwilling (often utterly evil) npcs do services for you. And npcs are run by the DM. As is the knowledge available by the casters about outsiders or other creatures in the first place (see knowledge skill description).

This is invariably directed at me, as I strongly advocate high level casters having low level called creatures contracted into doing his bidding. (generally succubi.) My counter now is the same as always. The CR of a succubi is so low that the wizard that does this no longer even gains EXP for killing them, should they get uppity. Commensurate risk occurs when you planar bind something such as a pit fiend. The recommended useage that I continually mention discludes strong combatants, and instead uses skilled individuals who are capable of preventing ambushes. Of course, the ones that have displeased me in game, were killed by thinaun weapons and dragged around as enslaved examples of why you don't try to backstab the wizard.

Boci

2009-09-05, 02:06 PM

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 02:07 PM

This is invariably directed at me, as I strongly advocate high level casters having low level called creatures contracted into doing his bidding. (generally succubi.) My counter now is the same as always. The CR of a succubi is so low that the wizard that does this no longer even gains EXP for killing them, should they get uppity. Commensurate risk occurs when you planar bind something such as a pit fiend. The recommended useage that I continually mention discludes strong combatants, and instead uses skilled individuals who are capable of preventing ambushes. Of course, the ones that have displeased me in game, were killed by thinaun weapons and dragged around as enslaved examples of why you don't try to backstab the wizard.

Actually I think this tactics is a great idea for a wizard demonologist (did I spell that right?). But it comes at a risk. And it does not show brokenness of the wizard class (or other class that gets that spell).
My point is that it is entirely up to the DM whether that lowish Succubus did not happen to be the paramour of the pit fiend the wizard fears. The spell interacts with npcs and thus the DM has to decide what goes and what not (much more than in other game instances, such as using weapons or casting a magic missile spell).

Giacomo, Sinfire's example was to show things the wizard can do that the fighter can't. How does your archery example add to the discussion?

No, his example was there to show how uber casters are due to flying. And I showed that this is not so.

The specific line is "the solid fog is so thick that any creature attempting to move through it progresses at a speed of 5 feet". Not "reduces to 5 ft".

I did not quote. And why do you now quote what proves your point wrong?

Yes but it also says "any attempt to move through it". Some DMs may think run falls under the "any attempt" thing.

+ what Pharaoh's Fist said.

I give up.:smallsigh:

- Giacomo

Boci

2009-09-05, 02:10 PM

No, his example was there to show how uber casters are due to flying. And I showed that this is not so.

You cannot argue his intentions. And what ever his intentions were, you cannot deny the fact that casters can fly at level 3, melee cannot.

I give up.:smallsigh:

- Giacomo

I do not like explaining things I see as obvious either but I do it.

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-05, 02:11 PM

No, his example was there to show how uber casters are due to flying. And I showed that this is not so.

I've just singlehanded proved you wrong. The Wizard starts outshining the Fighter at level 3 by being able to do something he can't do under his own power

I don't think saying "but I can shoot you down" is a counter to "I can do more things than you. (And am therefore better)"

I did not quote. And why do you now quote what proves your point wrong?

I give up.:smallsigh:

- Pharaoh's Fist

But seriously,

the solid fog is so thick that any creature attempting to move through it progresses at a speed of 5 feet
Is there an attempt at movement? Yes? Then it progresses at a speed of 5 feet. Not 5 feet per round, 5 feet.

Yukitsu

2009-09-05, 02:11 PM

Actually I think this tactics is a great idea for a wizard demonologist (did I spell that right?). But it comes at a risk. And it does not show brokenness of the wizard class (or other class that gets that spell).
My point is that it is entirely up to the DM whether that lowish Succubus did not happen to be the paramour of the pit fiend the wizard fears. The spell interacts with npcs and thus the DM has to decide what goes and what not (much more than in other game instances, such as using weapons or casting a magic missile spell).

There is a very low chance that a demon is a lover of a devil, unless your world is an awefully messed up one. :smallconfused:

The reason I summon demons and not devils is that demons don't have strong contacts or obligations or freindships and alliances. Devils do.

Even if the Baalor did have a favoured lover, it wouldn't be a succubous in all odds, but the upgraded version that has a higher charisma score from the fiend folio, which is beyond the safe binding range for this purpose. In the event that it isn't, I have solo killed a Baalor with a caster as low as level 17, and would subsequintly kill the succubous with a thinaun weapon. For theory purposes, my current level 9 has a 50/50 chance of killing a Baalor due to complete BS focus on one thing. Basically comes down to who wins initiative.

Sinfire Titan

2009-09-05, 02:11 PM

Oh nos! You mean the 3rd level wizard just used up two spells to the fighter's two arrows? And what is the wizard now going to do? And how come the fighter did not hear the wizard casting the silent/minor image spell? Many questions... all not pointing towards the direction of "brokenland" :smallsmile:

And your Fighter wasted a feat, 5 points off of his PB, and his weapon selection to attack something the Wizard gets to replace after an 8 hour rest.

But all non-casters in core can do that. ?? I do not see any problem here. As can the casters. It is up to individual maxing fu and DM style only how powerful they are doing that.

I've yet to see a non-caster take on a Dragon that is actually played to its strengths and not just some melee tank. Every time one showed up in an encounter it was the casters who dealt with it, as the non-casters couldn't even react to it.

How many of your games have 3 and less encounters a day

You know, I did a little bit of math a while back, and I came up with something interesting:

The biggest problem here was that 2-5 spells would be the most a Wizard would cast each combat. He wouldn't need more than that unless he was specifically designed to nova every battle. The other problem was spells/day. A wizard has 9 levels of spells, and 4-6 spells of each level (before items and bonus spells). That's about 54 spells/day. Possibly more.

Assuming the average combat lasts 3 rounds, and that the Wizard knows what he is doing, 3-5 spells would be cast and he could just sit back and do nothing. At the rate of 4 encounters/day, he's going to burn through 25 spells a majority of the time, just under half of his base allotment.

The Fighter, on the other hand, has anywhere from 1 to 8 attacks/round. Assuming he has pounce, he has between 4 and 8 attacks. Feats and magic items can add more to this value, but let's not take that into account for this and just assume he's doing TWFing for maximum attacks/round. Assuming his attack bonuses are high enough that these percentages can replace his BAB: 95%/95%/70%/70%/45%/45%/20%/20%. I know, not very optimal, but I'm doing a comparison.

Assuming a 3-round combat, the Fighter is going to be making 96 attack rolls. He's doing almost 4 times the effort, and odds are that his last 4 attacks each round are going to miss unless he gets decently lucky.

So the Wizard is ending encounters with approximately a quarter of the effort a Fighter is exerting. The Wizard is also able to contribute to situations where the Fighter is incapable of acting, and is able to cover for the Fighter in case something goes seriously wrong.

By the numbers, the Wizard is the one doing the least work and getting the most payload.

So the Wizard is doing a fourth of the work, and still winning encounters.

Guess what that means?

Kelpstrand

2009-09-05, 02:14 PM

Uhh.. Yeah guys. It's pretty clear that if you take a Run action in a solid Fog, you move 5ft.

That's what "progresses at a speed of 5ft" means. If you took a run action, you would progress at a speed of 20ft, which the fog does not allow.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 02:17 PM

IIs there an attempt at movement? Yes? Then it progresses at a speed of 5 feet. Not 5 feet per round, 5 feet.

Ah - there is a glimmer of hope. So you admit that the solid fog means you progress at a speed of 5 feet. And since run means you can move per round at 4x speed...?

- Giacomo

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-05, 02:19 PM

Ah, there is a glimmer of hope! Now, since you can't run without seeing, and Solid Fog severely blocks your sight...

Sinfire Titan

2009-09-05, 02:20 PM

No, his example was there to show how uber casters are due to flying. And I showed that this is not so.

I showed one thing, and one thing only: Casters are able to bypass restrictions placed on other characters far faster than the other characters are capable of doing so. Flight was one example. Have you ever seen a non-caster be completely unrestricted while under water under their own power? A caster can ignore the laws of physics, thermodynamics, and pretty much everything else the noncasters are restricted by. They can do this a minimum of 2 levels earlier than everyone else, and sometimes they can do things at all.

Fact: There will be a specific scenario that renders the Fighter unable to contribute a meaningful role to the party. That same scenario is a mere encounter to the Wizard.

For below level 5, the situation is an Incorporeal Enemy. For higher levels, the situation is anything with significant spellcasting abilities, as they are able to produce a situation where the Fighter is unable to contribute under his own power.

The words "under his own power" mean "with class features, racial traits, feats, and skills, but not magic items (as those are created by someone else)". The term noncaster means "no ability to use Supernatural abilities, Spells, or Spell-like abilities. This extends to Psionic powers, Supernatural maneuvers, Vestiges, and Soulmelds".

Under those constraints, I defy you to present a noncaster capable of dealing with a Dimensional Lock+Solid Fog+Forcecage.

The answer is simple: You can't.

Boci

2009-09-05, 02:22 PM

Ah - there is a glimmer of hope. So you admit that the solid fog means you progress at a speed of 5 feet. And since run means you can move per round at 4x speed...?

- Giacomo

Yes but "speed" is a very generic term. I'm sure WoTC has used the world epic before in a D&D sourcebook to describe something that didn't involve a single adventurer above 20th level.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 02:23 PM

Ah, there is a glimmer of hope! Now, since you can't run without seeing, and Solid Fog severely blocks your sight...

... and since we have found out that solid fog only blocks sight as the fog cloud spell and this only blocks sight beyond 5ft to total concealment ...
it means you CAN run out of it. Yeah!
Good that we have settled this one.:smallsmile:

- Giacomo

Boci

2009-09-05, 02:30 PM

... and since we have found out that solid fog only blocks sight as the fog cloud spell and this only blocks sight beyond 5ft to total concealment ...
it means you CAN run out of it. Yeah!
Good that we have settled this one.:smallsmile:

- Giacomo

Great. Unfortunatly the caster ray of exhaustion, so your exhausted or fatigued. In the cloud you stay.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 02:32 PM

I showed one thing, and one thing only: Casters are able to bypass restrictions placed on other characters far faster than the other characters are capable of doing so. Flight was one example. Have you ever seen a non-caster be completely unrestricted while under water under their own power? A caster can ignore the laws of physics, thermodynamics, and pretty much everything else the noncasters are restricted by. They can do this a minimum of 2 levels earlier than everyone else, and sometimes they can do things at all.

Fact: There will be a specific scenario that renders the Fighter unable to contribute a meaningful role to the party. That same scenario is a mere encounter to the Wizard.

For below level 5, the situation is an Incorporeal Enemy. For higher levels, the situation is anything with significant spellcasting abilities, as they are able to produce a situation where the Fighter is unable to contribute under his own power.

The words "under his own power" mean "with class features, racial traits, feats, and skills, but not magic items (as those are created by someone else)". The term noncaster means "no ability to use Supernatural abilities, Spells, or Spell-like abilities. This extends to Psionic powers, Supernatural maneuvers, Vestiges, and Soulmelds".

Under those constraints, I defy you to present a noncaster capable of dealing with a Dimensional Lock+Solid Fog+Forcecage.

The answer is simple: You can't.

And how will a caster escape from this problem without magic? See?
It is a completely arbitrary decision to deny a certain set of powers, abilities and items to one set of classes and allow another set of classes stuff that can overcome certain situations.
What your concern and that of many others imo boils down to is: items equate completely any power advantages casters may have, but you do not like items available as intended by the (core) rules. Which is completely fine by me. But when you houserule that items are not available (or only in a restricted way), then do not look for any imbalances in the rules.

Yes but "speed" is a very generic term. I'm sure WoTC has used the world epic before in a D&D sourcebook to describe something that didn't involve a single adventurer above 20th level.

It is not. It has a definition in the PHB that I provided above.

Great. Unfortunatly the caster ray of exhaustion, so your exhausted or fatigued. In the cloud you stay.

Only that the caster likely has no line of sight and thus may miss. And he should use a quickened version of it. All a lot of "ifs..." again (too many to make a point for "broken" wizards :smallsmile:)

- Giacomo

PS: will retreat to dinner now...

PairO'Dice Lost

2009-09-05, 02:34 PM

Ah - there is a glimmer of hope. So you admit that the solid fog means you progress at a speed of 5 feet. And since run means you can move per round at 4x speed...?

- Giacomo

You ignored Kelpstrand:

Uhh.. Yeah guys. It's pretty clear that if you take a Run action in a solid Fog, you move 5ft.

That's what "progresses at a speed of 5ft" means. If you took a run action, you would progress at a speed of 20ft, which the fog does not allow.

It says you progress at a speed of 5 feet. It does not say your speed is set to 5 feet. It does not say you take a penalty to your speed that reduces it to five feet. It does not say anything else that implies you can ignore this restriction by taking the run action.

It says you progress at a speed of 5 feet, which means that whether you're moving, double-moving, running, flying, or whatever, you can move 5 feet, period.

And how will a caster escape from this problem without magic? See?
It is a completely arbitrary decision to deny a certain set of powers, abilities and items to one set of classes and allow another set of classes stuff that can overcome certain situations.
What your concern and that of many others imo boils down to is: items equate completely any power advantages casters may have, but you do not like items available as intended by the (core) rules. Which is completely fine by me. But when you houserule that items are not available (or only in a restricted way), then do not look for any imbalances in the rules.

Here's the difference:

1) Items use up a finite set of resources, i.e. gold. Spells come back every day. Even if you buy only items which recharge daily, you've still spent money on that and not something else.

2) Items can be destroyed. You can stick an antimagic field on a caster, or bind and gag him, or do anything else to inhibit casting, and once that goes away he's just as capable of casting spells as he was before. If you Sunder or disjoin or otherwise break an item, it's gone, period, and you have to buy a new one.

3) Fighters don't use magic, they use magic items. If you want to argue that fighters are as good as casters if they have all the magic items they need, they're not being a fighter. The fact that you have to ignore a fighter's class abilities to put him on an even footing with a caster demonstrates that magic is superior to martial capability.

Milskidasith

2009-09-05, 02:34 PM

... and since we have found out that solid fog only blocks sight as the fog cloud spell and this only blocks sight beyond 5ft to total concealment ...
it means you CAN run out of it. Yeah!
Good that we have settled this one.:smallsmile:

- Giacomo

No, we haven't. Your "speed" in the solid fog isn't set to five feet. Any attempt at movement only allows you to move five feet. Running is an attempt at movement.

Even if it works, then the wizard just blasts you because you lost the concealment you were harping about earlier.

Boci

2009-09-05, 02:37 PM

Boci

2009-09-05, 02:39 PM

To people who think casters and non-casters are equal. Does that mean that if I allow melee complete warrior and PH 2, but deny it to casters then melee becomes broken?

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 02:48 PM

To people who think casters and non-casters are equal. Does that mean that if I allow melee complete warrior and PH 2, but deny it to casters then melee becomes broken?

It's a difficult call. I'd say PHB 2 holds a lot more stuff for casters than for non-casters (for instance, the broken celerity spells). Although there are also some powerful things for non-casters in the complete warrior.

- Giacomo

Boci

2009-09-05, 02:51 PM

It's a difficult call. I'd say PHB 2 holds a lot more stuff for casters than for non-casters (for instance, the broken celerity spells). Although there are also some powerful things for non-casters in the complete warrior.

- Giacomo

I would not call celerity broken. Celerity and immunity to dazing is. The thing is though, complete warrior will not help a fighter character deal with an invisible opponent or a flying one. They are stronger, but there are still to many ways their opponents can dodge their attacks.
Complete warrior does not allow a fighter to neutralize multiple threats at lower level, or debuff without a save, ect.

quick_comment

2009-09-05, 02:54 PM

Ironically, the best supplement for fighters is Complete Arcane, because it contains mage slayer and pierce magical concealment.

Edit: Experimental evidence shows that casters win (See: The test of spite, the arena I run on rpol, etc). This agrees with theoretical arguments. There is really no leg to stand on to argue that casters and noncasters are equal.

Yukitsu

2009-09-05, 03:02 PM

Also shown in the wizards website gauntlet thread linked to earlier here.

A particular spunky water halfling abjurer managed to get all the way through without expending any significant resources, I might add. :smalltongue:

Sinfire Titan

2009-09-05, 03:02 PM

And how will a caster escape from this problem without magic? See?
It is a completely arbitrary decision to deny a certain set of powers, abilities and items to one set of classes and allow another set of classes stuff that can overcome certain situations.
What your concern and that of many others imo boils down to is: items equate completely any power advantages casters may have, but you do not like items available as intended by the (core) rules. Which is completely fine by me. But when you houserule that items are not available (or only in a restricted way), then do not look for any imbalances in the rules.

A set of powers not derived from character advancement which, technically, items are not (the players are under no constraints to buy magic items at all, but they are required to take levels, gain feats, and spend skill points).

I specifically left the noncasters their class features, and you are suggesting that we impose similar restraints+no class features on the casters? That's a double-standard.

Its also worth noting that I left a very obvious escape route in that trap: Iron Heart Surge. A caster is capable of escaping two of those spells using MDJ, and the third (Forcecage) can be escaped via Quickened Dimension Door.

Again, the PCs are never required to buy items. It's a good idea to buy them, but at no point in their career (save for specific classes such as the Legacy Champion and Reverent Blade) are they ever required to own a single item. They are, however, required to fill in class features, feats, levels, and skill points. Without those, the game cannot be played. Spells may be optional to prepare, but there's only two things that can absolutely deny a spellcaster his spells/day: AMF's and Dead Magic Zones (and both of those can be bypassed via Invoke Magic, a 9th level spell).

You suggested the caster find a way out of that without using their spells, a class feature. If they spell slots were derived from magic items I would agree to this. But spells are a class feature of the full casters.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 03:05 PM

I would not call celerity broken. Celerity and immunity to dazing is. The thing is though, complete warrior will not help a fighter character deal with an invisible opponent or a flying one. They are stronger, but there are still to many ways their opponents can dodge their attacks.
Complete warrior does not allow a fighter to neutralize multiple threats at lower level, or debuff without a save, ect.

Actually a fighter can already deal with an invisible opponent or a flying one in core. Also, in core, multiple threats can be neutralised at lower level or debuffed without a save. Also, at low levels.
Invisible: blind-fight feat and/or set up total concealment of your own (smoke, for instance).
Flying: Missile attacks.
Multiple threats: power attack and cleave. Or Whirwind attack by level 4. Or combat reflexes and improved trip.
Debuff without a save: grapple (loses DEX bonus to AC vs other enemies), trip (-4 to hit, -4 to AC). Just as examples.

Edit: Experimental evidence shows that casters win (See: The test of spite, the arena I run on rpol, etc). This agrees with theoretical arguments. There is really no leg to stand on to argue that casters and noncasters are equal.

I do not know about your experience details -.but imo a lot of arena evidence is biased because the setting is good for casters (safe starting distance, buffing round(s), full spells available, empty hall without ways to hide or get total concealment etc.)

- Giacomo

Yukitsu

2009-09-05, 03:07 PM

I do not know about your experience details -.but imo a lot of arena evidence is biased because the setting is good for casters (safe starting distance, buffing round(s), full spells available, empty hall without ways to hide or get total concealment etc.)

- Giacomo

Try the gauntlet from the wizards website. It contained nothing but encounters in the dark (practically), a snake that was hiding and using scent, an animated rug lying as a trap, and a shadow that came up from the ground. In this instance, casters were still able to deal with a larger number of threats than the martial types, despite starting in melee distance.

As an aside, long empty halls benefit both casters and non-casters about equally. Casters like difficult terrain that slows targets, and for the most part ignore partial cover and concealment, since many don't roll for attacks. The only good part about open spaces is a clear line of effect. Inversely, martial types like a lack of difficult terrain because it lets them close, and the lack of obstacles prevents penalties from cover and concealment on their attack rolls.

Boci

2009-09-05, 03:11 PM

.
Invisible: blind-fight feat and/or set up total concealment of your own (smoke, for instance).

Blind fight doesn't save a fighter, just stops them from falling too far down.

Flying: Missile attacks.

At lower levels, melee fighters will be doing 1d8 per attack. Not very good.

Multiple threats: power attack and cleave. Or Whirwind attack by level 4. Or combat reflexes and improved trip.

Cleave requires them to be adjacent and whirlwing requires several worthless feats. Combay reflexes and improved trip is three feats, but at least those are decent feats.

Debuff without a save: grapple (loses DEX bonus to AC vs other enemies), trip (-4 to hit, -4 to AC). Just as examples.

Opposed roll. Technically its not a save, but its still a chance to avoid it. And all of these require feats. And you cannot seriously be comparing the two. Name a way a 6th level fighte can fatigue an opponent without a save.

Is there a way fighters can do this without spending feats? No (and do not compare feats to spells, unless fighters can retrain them every morning). And what about other classes that hardly get any feats?

I do not know about your experience details -.but imo a lot of arena evidence is biased because the setting is good for casters (safe starting distance, buffing round(s), full spells available, empty hall without ways to hide or get total concealment etc.)

- Giacomo

Arena favour melee-ers just as frequently.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-05, 03:17 PM

Hi Sinfire Titan,

I guess your comments are at the heart of a lot of the differences that we have. And they imo just highlight that we approach the 3.5 core game in a completely different way - unsurprisingly resulting in a completely different gaming experience.

A set of powers not derived from character advancement which, technically, items are not (the players are under no constraints to buy magic items at all, but they are required to take levels, gain feats, and spend skill points).

I think players are not required to spend skill points or take feats when they rise in level at all. But that's not the point. The game assumes the pcs get items or (as per DMG) the designers caution that the game can get imbalanced. (which is what this thread is about).

I specifically left the noncasters their class features, and you are suggesting that we impose similar restraints+no class features on the casters? That's a double-standard.

No, it is not a double-standard. You choose to take out a certain part of the original rules (items) resulting in non-caster weakness and I could do the same, saying "hey, let's today just play without any spells", resulting in caster weakness.

Its also worth noting that I left a very obvious escape route in that trap: Iron Heart Surge. A caster is capable of escaping two of those spells using MDJ, and the third (Forcecage) can be escaped via Quickened Dimension Door.

Iron heart surge iirc does not get you out of a forcecage. And when the caster uses magic to escape from a magical problem why deny this to non-casters?

Again, the PCs are never required to buy items. It's a good idea to buy them, but at no point in their career (save for specific classes such as the Legacy Champion and Reverent Blade) are they ever required to own a single item. They are, however, required to fill in class features, feats, levels, and skill points. Without those, the game cannot be played. Spells may be optional to prepare, but there's only two things that can absolutely deny a spellcaster his spells/day: AMF's and Dead Magic Zones (and both of those can be bypassed via Invoke Magic, a 9th level spell).

Oh, you can also easily block most casting by having an adventure where the caster loses his tongue. It's the same as denying a fighter a magic weapon and heaping him with creatures that are only hit by magic. What is this going to prove?

You suggested the caster find a way out of that without using their spells, a class feature. If they spell slots were derived from magic items I would agree to this. But spells are a class feature of the full casters.

And this is where we disagree - but I guess it just boils down to a matter of taste. You like to play with less item dependency. I like to play with more counters and challenges to caster abilities.
But there is nothing in our choices that says that there is an inherent imbalance in the rules.

- Giacomo

Boci

2009-09-05, 03:17 PM

9mm

2009-09-05, 03:23 PM

I do not know about your experience details -.but imo a lot of arena evidence is biased because the setting is good for casters (safe starting distance, buffing round(s), full spells available, empty hall without ways to hide or get total concealment etc.)

- Giacomo

Then explain why the ONLY recent Caster vs Melee win for melee in ToS was done by bouncing Olo's invocation back at him, in terrain and circumstances that favored him?

Because Spells > Melee, and I freaking love melee; I don't like spellcasting but when over 50% of WBL in test of spite is going to ANTI-SPELL equipment instead of equipment that would improve what I want Slade and John to do there is a disparty in power, there is no way around this fact. I didn't be Olo, I tricked Olo into beating himself. There is a difference.

shadow_archmagi

2009-09-05, 03:23 PM

Trip, grapple, ranged, blind-fight (which just means "if you guess where the enemy is and if you roll well enough to hit you only have a 25% chance of missing rather than 50%)...

Excuse me if I'm wrong, but don't most fighters pick ONE of those (or damage-dealing) and then build themselves around it?

It seems to me, Giacomo, that what you're saying is

"You get something for free as a natural ability, but that isn't overpowered because I can do the same thing by spending large amounts of money to buy items from you!"

Also, yes, an archer-specced fighter is going to stand a decent chance against a wizard that tries to pull flight. But the thing is, we are not playing Archer Flier Rock. I'm flying over the traps, I'm flying over the pack of wolves, I'm flying over the castle walls... my ability to fly is helping me through a *lot* more than your ability to arch is.

quick_comment

2009-09-05, 03:24 PM

What about arena fights with 30ft starting, no time to buff, non-difficult terrain and no other features?

Heck, Id be willing to do core only, both players start adjacent to each other, wizard concedes initative, has no precast buffs active that last less than 24 hours and no prep time.

Boci

2009-09-05, 03:24 PM

I think players are not required to spend skill points or take feats when they rise in level at all. But that's not the point. The game assumes the pcs get items or (as per DMG) the designers caution that the game can get imbalanced. (which is what this thread is about).

Actually the rules state you must spend skill point and get feats. And if melee-ers spend all their cash countering spells, they are going to suck a fighting.

Iron heart surge iirc does not get you out of a forcecage. And when the caster uses magic to escape from a magical problem why deny this to non-casters?

Because its his ability. No heroe should be crippled if they have to fight without magical gear, but meler-ers are.

Oh, you can also easily block most casting by having an adventure where the caster loses his tongue. It's the same as denying a fighter a magic weapon and heaping him with creatures that are only hit by magic. What is this going to prove?

No. A caster without his tongue is like a fighter without his arm. And a caster can still use silent spell. A caster is not nearly as harmed by no items then a melee-er is.

And this is where we disagree - but I guess it just boils down to a matter of taste. You like to play with less item dependency. I like to play with more counters and challenges to caster abilities.

Such as?

But there is nothing in our choices that says that there is an inherent imbalance in the rules.

We have already established that there needs to be multiple encounters per day or caster rule. Isn't that an imbalance?

Yukitsu

2009-09-05, 03:25 PM

Oslecamo

2009-09-05, 03:31 PM

Such as?

I drived my batman wizard half mad by throwing him a monster wich has a natural ability to deflect both rays and single target spells, high SR and flies/ethereals to escape fogs and other traps, all whitout needing of changing feats or templates.

Now it was a quite nasty monster, but basically, any monster with high mobility(and there's a lot of them out there) will threaten the caster a lot more than slow big dumb brute nº459, wich are nothing more than party fodder.

Another thing to take in mind is to throw multiple monsters. One single monster is much easier to disable when it is outnumbered by the PCs, but when it has allies of it's own, it's much more challenging.

Yukitsu

2009-09-05, 03:35 PM

Did your non-casters get to do much to this thing? Because frankly, I doubt they would either.

Kylarra

2009-09-05, 03:35 PM

I drived my batman wizard half mad by throwing him a monster wich has a natural ability to deflect both rays and single target spells, high SR and flies/ethereals to escape fogs and other traps, all whitout needing of changing feats or templates.
I guess a counterpoint to that would be, what can the fighter (or other noncaster) do against that?

lol ninja

Boci

2009-09-05, 03:37 PM

I drived my batman wizard half mad by throwing him a monster wich has a natural ability to deflect both rays and single target spells, high SR and flies/ethereals to escape fogs and other traps, all whitout needing of changing feats or templates.

Wow, congratulations. You gave it abilities that deliberatly neutralized his abilities. And how did the melee-ers fair in that battle? (Wow, double ninja'd)

Now it was a quite nasty monster, but basically, any monster with high mobility(and there's a lot of them out there) will threaten the caster a lot more than slow big dumb brute nº459, wich are nothing more than party fodder.

Ray of exhasution, goodbuye mobility in a lot of cases.

Another thing to take in mind is to throw multiple monsters. One single monster is much easier to disable when it is outnumbered by the PCs, but when it has allies of it's own, it's much more challenging.

There are lots of area targetting spells, and melers are also screwed by loads of foes.

vikbra

2009-09-05, 03:45 PM

I drived my batman wizard half mad by throwing him a monster wich has a natural ability to deflect both rays and single target spells, high SR and flies/ethereals to escape fogs and other traps, all whitout needing of changing feats or templates.

Eh... wouldn't that kind of monster still be more dangerous for a melee fighter than for a wizard?

Wow ninja'd...

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-05, 03:46 PM

Ozzy, all you have proven is that the DM is more powerful than his players.

Yukitsu

2009-09-05, 03:48 PM

Ozzy, all you have proven is that the DM is more powerful than his players.

Not really in this case. Most of my wizards would not have any particular issue with this encounter, other than irritation.

My builds emphasize shadow spells, and would thus hit it with shadow evoked blasty spells, after buffing with a wand of true casting.

shadow_archmagi

2009-09-05, 03:49 PM

I used a monster that was immune to single-target spells and had a strong chance to resist area spells and also could bypass terrain-based difficulties. It was effectively immune to magic. It caused a lot of headaches for our magic user.

I'm not sure what your point is. I bet my "immune to melee and ranged" golem would cause a lot of havoc for a fighter, too.

Besides, I'm sure that there would be some way for a wizard to deal with it, somewhere.

Boci

2009-09-05, 03:50 PM

Not really in this case. Most of my wizards would not have any particular issue with this encounter, other than irritation.

I don't know. A "natural ability to deflect both rays and single target spells" is pretty crippling. But I'm sure melee would be annoyed by a creature that automatically deflects weapon attacks. (Damit, not again)

Yukitsu

2009-09-05, 03:51 PM

I don't know. A "natural ability to deflect both rays and single target spells" is pretty crippling. But I'm sure melee would be annoyed by a creature that automatically deflects weapon attacks.

I keep on hand some forms of non single target abilities. My current build would use her rod of chain spell on a clutch of orcus and steal its heart. :smalltongue: Or let someone coup it while it's helpless from the clutch.

quick_comment

2009-09-05, 03:57 PM

Not to mention the monster is still vulnerable to being forcecaged (unless it was too large)

Boci

2009-09-05, 03:58 PM

Not to mention the monster is still vulnerable to being forcecaged (unless it was too large)

I don't get the forcecage craze. Don't most caster specialize, choosing evocation as one of their prohibited schools.

Yukitsu

2009-09-05, 03:59 PM

I don't get the forcecage craze. Don't most caster specialize, choosing evocation as one of their prohibited schools.

Yeah, I never got it either. I usually use shadow resilient spheres when I really need something like that.

quick_comment

2009-09-05, 04:04 PM

I don't get the forcecage craze. Don't most caster specialize, choosing evocation as one of their prohibited schools.

Elven generalists dont lose any schools, and I usually do not ban evocation anyway. Not to mention that a transmutation specialist can give up the bonus feats he gains as a wizard to select a bunch of spells to treat as transmutation spells.

Boci

2009-09-05, 04:07 PM

Elven generalists dont lose any schools, and I usually do not ban evocation anyway. Not to mention that a transmutation specialist can give up the bonus feats he gains as a wizard to select a bunch of spells to treat as transmutation spells.

True, but the OP needs it to be proved that core caster out shine others.

Kesnit

2009-09-05, 04:11 PM

I guess the point is that non casters are not the worst thing in the world. In all the games I play I've never seen anyone feel so marginalized by playing a fighter that the game was not fun for them.

Let me tell you about an encounter I was involved with not long ago. 2 LVL 18 PC's (Hexblade, me, with hellhound familiar*) and a True Necro with her stack of controlled undead. (I can't remember all of them, but I know she had a 15 or 16 HD intelligent melee undead and several lower HD rogues, rangers, and a barbarian). There were also 2 DMPCs who were completely legit, but way overpowered compared to me or the TN.

The enemies were some kind of undead with a template that gave them a permanent aura of cold and some other undead that I don't remember.

Round 1: Hexblade went in and did some damage, but discovered the aura of cold and knew Marvolo (the hellhound) took double damage from cold. So I held my familiar out of the aura. The aura was so large that holding him out took him out of range of his breath weapon. The undead (unaffected by the aura) raced in and began to attack. The TN rebuked and got rid of the undead that I don't remember. (About half of the encounter.)
Round 2: My hexblade moved back by Marvolo. The undead continued their attack. The TN cast an AoE spell that did damage to most of the enemies.
Round 3: I cast protection from elements (cold) on myself and Marvolo. Undead continue their attacks. TN casts a BC spell (can't remember what). Then some other undead (from the MM) appears between me/Marvolo and the rest of the encounter. Said undead has an aura of something that requires a fort save every round you are in it. (Fail your save and you are sickened.)
Round 4: Hexblade steps out of aura (hellhound was already out) and casts a spell at the new undead. However, since the Hexblade's CL is 9 and the undead's SR is about 25, my chances of ever getting a spell through are pretty slim. Marvolo breathes at it, but the DC of the save is 20 (I had given him a collar that upped his STR and CON), the undead made the save easily. Allied undead continue their attacks. TN casts another damage spell. Enemy undead start falling.
Round 5:Marvolo and I start circling around the new undead to stay out of its aura. Allied undead continue their attacks. TN heals allied undead. Enemy undead continue falling.
Round 6:We continue circling around the new undead to stay out of its aura. Allied undead continue their attacks. TN casts another damage spell. Enemy undead continue falling.
Round 7: Marvolo and Hexblade reach enemy undead and get 1 attack off each. Marvolo missed, Hexblade hit and managed to do about 20 damage. (1d8 weapon +5 STR +1d6 electrical +2d6 Vicious. I also had +1d6 cold, but that roll actually healed them.) Allied undead continue their attacks. TN heals allied undead. Enemy undead continue falling.

A few more rounds and the cold-auraed undead were all dead (again). At which point the party turned to the other undead. Several more rounds and it was re-dead. Most of that came from the undead allies, the DMPCs, and the TN, as Marvolo couldn't hit very well (needed I think 13 or higher) and I was only doing about 40-45/round (my last attack never hit).

It took 7 rounds before my melee character could do anything. By the time I did get there, the battle was pretty much over. Even once I did get there, the TN (between her spells and all the undead she controlled) was still doing about 5 times the damage I was (assuming she wasn't healing or doing BC, and even then, the undead were attacking). My spells were useless as I either couldn't beat SR, the saves were low or they didn't affect mindless creatures. (SR 25 isn't outlandish against LVL 18 characters. Hexblades only have up to LVL 4 spells.) I can't remember if I got the curse to work or not.

* I had calculated the abilities of my hellhound without taking into account the CL reduction that comes into play when you take a higher level familiar. So he had the bonuses of my full CL - 9 - rather than the lower bonues he should have had.

And really this save or die, instant death at 1st level is just nonsense. It really makes me think people are not actually playing D&D.

Other people have already given examples of save-or-die at first level. Although they aren't, in reality, save or die in that failing the save won't kill you. However, they are for all practical purposes save-or-die since the enemy falls asleep or is otherwise neutralized.

Sinfire Titan

2009-09-05, 04:26 PM

And this is where we disagree - but I guess it just boils down to a matter of taste. You like to play with less item dependency. I like to play with more counters and challenges to caster abilities.

Congratulations, you just completely misinterpreted my point. Twice. I denied the noncasters of their items, and I will enforce the same thing to the casters: they ca't use items either. Guess what? They will still win.

I actually accept the whole Item-Dependency problem. I've acknowledged this with one of my players, a Shifter Totemist/Barbarian using VoP and aiming for Totem Rager/Weretouched Master. I recognize the fact that his lack of items is actually hurting him (something that has just recently started popping up, and he's only 3rd level), and I have considered bending the rules for this particular party. Two of the other PCs are getting improved WBL, and this PC will be allowed to bypass some restrictions on VoP (I'll be giving him the benefits of magical locations and some modified Legacy Items, at most a total of 300k in equipment, about half of his WBL, without it violating VoP).

Personally, I feel Items should not be allowed to duplicate spell effects. I've been through campaigns that allow this, and found it incredibly dull because I was always prepared. I've also seen the results of allowing magic items as-written into a game (something that ruined my enjoyment of Morrowind and Oblivion). I'd prefer it if PCs could operate without items, but I recognize that even classes built around that concept (the Incarnate and Totemist, specifically) need some to get by.

EleventhHour

2009-09-05, 05:47 PM

Besides, I'm sure that there would be some way for a wizard to deal with it, somewhere.

Get it onto a stone floor (if it isn't already), Stone to Mud, it sinks (even just an inch or two), Quickened Mud to Stone. Trapped. Encounter over, you can walk around it now.

@V- Hm...

Yukitsu

2009-09-05, 05:58 PM

Actually, that works on golems. This thing was going ethereal.

An orbizard would work, as none of the reflect abilities that I can think of work on SR: no spells.

shadow_archmagi

2009-09-05, 08:09 PM

Actually, that works on golems. This thing was going ethereal.

An orbizard would work, as none of the reflect abilities that I can think of work on SR: no spells.

I suppose you'd have to find an area spell that says "Screw you, ethereal!" and THEN trap it in stone.

Sinfire Titan

2009-09-05, 08:24 PM

I suppose you'd have to find an area spell that says "Screw you, ethereal!" and THEN trap it in stone.

There's one in Tome of Magic, IIRC.

Starbuck_II

2009-09-05, 08:27 PM

There's one in Tome of Magic, IIRC.

The only time a Truenamer can finally say: Screw the rules: I've got money!

Eldariel

2009-09-05, 08:27 PM

I suppose you'd have to find an area spell that says "Screw you, ethereal!" and THEN trap it in stone.

Like Force Manifest? Really handy combined with Dimensional Lock and whatnot to create a true cube of death you can't escape with anything short of Disintegrate (at which point, your readied action to cast another Cage if first one disappears goes off).

sofawall

2009-09-05, 09:42 PM

I only really read until page 4, but Id like to say this.

I was in a game where I was using Greater Blink, Great Thunderclap and Nauseating Fog, stuff at that level. Good, not the best, but damn good. The Cleric was rocking Enlarge Person and Diving Power. The rogue was picking pockets in another room, most of the time, and the ranger was useless, but was waiting to try to backstab me and leave the party (he was planning on starting a Psion).

The Fighter, (well, actually, Champion (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/mYkD5jL8N9SAcClN3pZ.html)) actually came up to my between games and asked to me to help him make a new character. He wanted to be a sorcerer. Why? Because he said "All I ever get to do is charge and hit. If I'm lucky, the enemy is dead. You get to take out whole mobs in one spell unless you're unlucky." He was bored being a fighter-type while seeing a caster. He also mentioned how the Cleric was a better fighter, and able to heal and summon...

EDIT: Oh, and looking over the spell list in the PHB? First spell he picked? Polymorph, because he liked the idea. I had to convince not to pick it, because it would break the game. He looked over the actual mechanics, and agreed, the DM would slap him for having it on his spell list, never mind using it.

Also, hilarious thing. Different game, the DM sent a Cyrohyrda at us. I, being a War Weaver, decided to turn the entire 5-man party into even bigger hydras.

Leon

2009-09-05, 10:18 PM

Yes you do.

Sorry didn't see the part where i had to provide detailed deviance in a (now) protracted online argument
I opened with a simple agreement to a post, you your counter and then my simple yet correct response and then you with yours and a smug after glow for some reason

Tell me something: Can fighters fly under their own power before level 5 without using a race that has a level adjustment? Because Wizards can do that at level 3 (Levitate, Alter Self).

I've just singlehanded proved you wrong. The Wizard starts outshining the Fighter at level 3 by being able to do something he can't do under his own power. That's the tip of the iceberg.

A Fighter can not fly, but a Wizard/Cleric/what ever the heck can and should be able to supply the rest of the party with magical support

We have a Barbarian and a Fighter in our current group - by themselves they are so so beat sticks but when the rest of us Buff them (Rest of us being a Cleric, Archivist and a Sorcerer) they go off in a big way.

Don't know about you but I'm playing a Team Game, if i have a strong character I'll be helping the less so strong team members so we can achieve what we set out to do rather than trying to win all the glory and limelight as a sole paragon - that is what CRPGs are for

9mm

2009-09-05, 10:50 PM

We have a Barbarian and a Fighter in our current group - by themselves they are so so beat sticks but when the rest of us Buff them (Rest of us being a Cleric, Archivist and a Sorcerer) they go off in a big way.

Don't know about you but I'm playing a Team Game, if i have a strong character I'll be helping the less so strong team members so we can achieve what we set out to do rather than trying to win all the glory and limelight as a sole paragon - that is what CRPGs are for

congradulations, your playing Batman; the problem is, with one spell more (polymorph/shapechange) the barbarian and fighter become redundent...

Teron

2009-09-05, 10:59 PM

Or you could have a CoDzilla instead of a fighter. Their best buffs are self-only anyway.

sofawall

2009-09-05, 11:10 PM

War Weaver is a hilarious class.

"I, as a move action, give me and my whole party a 50% miss chance, a Fighter bonus feat, +16 str, a bite attack, natural armour, con boost, haste and fly. Oh, and we're all Hydras."

Yeah...

Omegonthesane

2009-09-06, 02:30 AM

congradulations, your playing Batman; the problem is, with one spell more (polymorph/shapechange) the barbarian and fighter become redundent...

I think we've already proved that Wizards must make a gentleman's agreement not to break the game. It would be more pertinent to ask what spells they must swear never to use, and I think someone already listed the core spells that break the game.

If you need a fluff explanation, Pun-Pun got his WIS so hight hat he realised he was in a game and devoted himself to preventing game-breaking cheese, probably to make sure no one ever caught up with him in power.

Boci

2009-09-06, 03:27 AM

Sorry didn't see the part where i had to provide detailed deviance in a (now) protracted online argument
I opened with a simple agreement to a post, you your counter and then my simple yet correct response and then you with yours and a smug after glow for some reason

That funny, because you then went on to do just that. Until now the number pf words in your combined posts in this thread was barely a double digit number. At least now your providing evidence for your claims.

A Fighter can not fly, but a Wizard/Cleric/what ever the heck can and should be able to supply the rest of the party with magical support

Why? What if I want to play a caster who is primarily a debuffer?

We have a Barbarian and a Fighter in our current group - by themselves they are so so beat sticks but when the rest of us Buff them (Rest of us being a Cleric, Archivist and a Sorcerer) they go off in a big way.

Great. Look on the bright side. Depending on what level you are, pretty soon they will become useless and then you can focus your spell's on the enemy.

Don't know about you but I'm playing a Team Game, if i have a strong character I'll be helping the less so strong team members so we can achieve what we set out to do rather than trying to win all the glory and limelight as a sole paragon - that is what CRPGs are for

I like the concept of team games. The problem is, as a melee character, I cannot always contribute to the team equally.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-06, 08:18 AM

Congratulations, you just completely misinterpreted my point. Twice. I denied the noncasters of their items, and I will enforce the same thing to the casters: they ca't use items either. Guess what? They will still win.

No, I did not misinterpret. You wish to deny a certain element of the game to everyone: items. Result: Casters ahead.
I can easily do the same and say: the element denied in my game is magic (e.g. historical middle-ages campaign).
Result: Non-casters win.
Say, you make a slave campaign where no-one will have a chance to get weapons. Result: Monks beat fighters in melee hands down (literally:smallsmile:).
Say, you make a campaign where there are no items at all. Result: sorcerer beats all other casters (who need holy symbols or spellbooks).
And so on. And so on. No rules imbalance per se; imbalance only results when you houserule parts of the rules away. It does not matter whether you do it for everyone; some will always be hurt more than others when you deviate from the original balance.
Now it IS possible to keep a balanced game from when deviating from the original rules. For instance, playing without magic items (or keeping them very rare) limits access of key magic for non-casters. Then, simply houserule that various spells that can only be escaped by magic (force cage etc) do not exist. Result: balance restored.:smallsmile:

I actually accept the whole Item-Dependency problem. I've acknowledged this with one of my players, a Shifter Totemist/Barbarian using VoP and aiming for Totem Rager/Weretouched Master. I recognize the fact that his lack of items is actually hurting him (something that has just recently started popping up, and he's only 3rd level), and I have considered bending the rules for this particular party. Two of the other PCs are getting improved WBL, and this PC will be allowed to bypass some restrictions on VoP (I'll be giving him the benefits of magical locations and some modified Legacy Items, at most a total of 300k in equipment, about half of his WBL, without it violating VoP).

What I acknowledge is that many players or DMs do not like that items are an integral part of the power of their characters (or integral part of the balancing), as envisioned by the core rules.
The problem is that the moment you say "ah, items are something special that cannot be bought and will only be a reward or for this or rare find because of that", then you get exactly the problems many describe as problems for non-casters (OK, in particular for the high-level area).

Personally, I feel Items should not be allowed to duplicate spell effects. I've been through campaigns that allow this, and found it incredibly dull because I was always prepared. I've also seen the results of allowing magic items as-written into a game (something that ruined my enjoyment of Morrowind and Oblivion). I'd prefer it if PCs could operate without items, but I recognize that even classes built around that concept (the Incarnate and Totemist, specifically) need some to get by.

True, most items do that exactly- they are duplicating spells. In fact, I cannot name any item that does not duplicate a spell effect (all are based on an existing spell or more for their creation iirc).
Again, it's completely OK not to like that and only play with rare artefacts that have unusual effects, but then you have left the usual core rules that are the basis for rule balance discussion.

- Giacomo

Edit/PS: Have to comment on this one...

IAlso, hilarious thing. Different game, the DM sent a Cyrohyrda at us. I, being a War Weaver, decided to turn the entire 5-man party into even bigger hydras.

...you mean...you turned the whole party into creatures that are as slow as your opponent, with likely lower AC, without ability to speak (so no more spellcasting), no more ranged weapons (hydras cannot use weapons), no multiple attacks (since that is not gained with the polymorph spell), while the opponent hydra was able pepper you with its breath weapon and multi-head attacks while moving?

Out of interest: How many of your party survived this "broken" use of the polymorph spell?*:smallamused:

It is fascinating what is being considered "broken spellcasting" sometimes.

*edit2: it may that it was some special class ability that also provide other boons- but a polymorphing effect imo is not wise in all situations ...

Starbuck_II

2009-09-06, 09:01 AM

...you mean...you turned the whole party into creatures that are as slow as your opponent, with likely lower AC, without ability to speak (so no more spellcasting), no more ranged weapons (hydras cannot use weapons), no multiple attacks (since that is not gained with the polymorph spell), while the opponent hydra was able pepper you with its breath weapon and multi-head attacks while moving?

Out of interest: How many of your party survived this "broken" use of the polymorph spell?*:smallamused:

It is fascinating what is being considered "broken spellcasting" sometimes.

*edit2: it may that it was some special class ability that also provide other boons- but a polymorphing effect imo is not wise in all situations ...

Dude, Polymorph grants all the heads on a standard action (the PCs get that): don't turn ice cream into crap on us. You know it works.

Boci

2009-09-06, 09:49 AM

Tyndmyr

2009-09-06, 10:36 AM

True, but the OP needs it to be proved that core caster out shine others.

Well, that invented monster certainly isn't core only.

They've proven that a custom monster designed to be immune to most wizard attacks is actually difficult for core wizards that have banned a certain school.

Um..congrats?

Edit: I presume a standard weapon is assumed for melee types, just like a spellbook is assumed for wizards. Side note: There are a few different way to circumvent the spellbook limitation, too. Tattooed on the body is one such way. There are feats to circumvent a spellbook entirely for a portion of your spells.

Honestly, if you allowed standard wealth by level and pitted the classes against each other, I suspect the casters would still win. Heck, we could do this, core only, if you like. Wouldn't take too long.

Boci

2009-09-06, 11:18 AM

Well, that invented monster certainly isn't core only.

They've proven that a custom monster designed to be immune to most wizard attacks is actually difficult for core wizards that have banned a certain school.

Um..congrats?

Edit: I presume a standard weapon is assumed for melee types, just like a spellbook is assumed for wizards. Side note: There are a few different way to circumvent the spellbook limitation, too. Tattooed on the body is one such way. There are feats to circumvent a spellbook entirely for a portion of your spells.

Honestly, if you allowed standard wealth by level and pitted the classes against each other, I suspect the casters would still win. Heck, we could do this, core only, if you like. Wouldn't take too long.

Well the OP hasn't commented on this thread for quite some time. Hopefully he already has what he needs. As for the dual thing, it doesn't work, because people claim it favours the wizards and is thus bias towards casters (read: it disproves my argument so I call it invalid)

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-06, 11:28 AM

There were, iirc, a few offers to go on a field and with conditions of a melee character's choice, but those offers were not picked up on.

Arakune

2009-09-06, 12:31 PM

No, I did not misinterpret. You wish to deny a certain element of the game to everyone: items. Result: Casters ahead.
I can easily do the same and say: the element denied in my game is magic (e.g. historical middle-ages campaign).
Result: Non-casters win.

There's a little bit of problem with your logic (as always): if there is absolutely NO magic, them there is no magic items (since they are still magical). This way, your campaign either fall to two options: all the enemies are humanoids with LA +0~+2 at BEST or you will have big problems slaying some monsters that are supernatural by nature or have some supernatural tricks; or order to defeat a dragon for example you will need a small/large army of adventurers, and while this is not unheard of (The Hobbit) at this point you are not playing D&D anymore, where the point is to make a handful of idiots crazy brave people go to slay the dragon, and not an army to do it.

IF by eliminating all supernatural powers along with magic, them I see no point in keeping supernatural creatures at all (you know, no magic and stuff?) and you cut a lot of monsters from MM, making this a game of race A vs race B. While it can also be fun, it's not D&D anymore too.

Ozymandias9

2009-09-06, 01:08 PM

Arakune

2009-09-06, 01:18 PM

What makes a class broken is that the casting classes are balanced around an expendable but regularly replenishing resource system, but rarely are rarely facing combat often enough to have those resources significantly taxed between replenishment.
That is, casting becomes broken in a campaign averaging 3-5 round combat 2-3 times a day.

I design encounters around a minimum of 15 rounds and 10-20 encounters per day (the range is because I generally design some to be avoidable). It makes spell conservation far more necessary and increases the value of healing. And that's still only 30 minutes of actual combat each day.

15 rounds? Are they facing some kind of army each combat?

In the games I played (4th editon most, 3.5 two, but still) the longest encounter lasted 10~12 rounds and was almost a TPK (a bad design for a custom monster), and the second longest one lasted 6 rounds.

And the GM was quite cruel with his encounters...

HamHam

2009-09-06, 01:28 PM

What makes a class broken is that the casting classes are balanced around an expendable but regularly replenishing resource system, but rarely are rarely facing combat often enough to have those resources significantly taxed between replenishment.
That is, casting becomes broken in a campaign averaging 3-5 round combat 2-3 times a day.

I design encounters around a minimum of 15 rounds and 10-20 encounters per day (the range is because I generally design some to be avoidable). It makes spell conservation far more necessary and increases the value of healing. And that's still only 30 minutes of actual combat each day.

So it takes you 5 gaming sessions to get through one in game day?

And that's practically impossible to do without a complete overhaul of the system anyway.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-06, 01:42 PM

Dude, Polymorph grants all the heads on a standard action (the PCs get that): don't turn ice cream into crap on us. You know it works.

No, they do not. Polymorph is based on alter self. Alter self explicitly excludes the ability to get more attacks due to more limbs of the body. Polymorph does not alter this explicit rule and only grants on top of alter self more types to choose from, then DEX, STR, CON (though not for hp purposes) and extraordinary attacks. The ability to move and attack with all heads, and also attacking with all heads is not listed among the extraordinary attacks (ex) of the hydra.
And even IF (a big IF) the interpretation of the spell is controversial, why then go for the broken interpretation?

Yes but taking away melee's ability to use weapons hurts them like a caster without spells. Items for nobody hurts melee more. If you ban class features, ofcourse a class is going to siffer. If you ban some other form of support, all classes should suffer rougly equally.

In your view, yes: all classes SHOULD suffer roughly equally. That is what YOU would expect of a gaming system. But D&D is different. Having the appropriate power level of items is integral to the game. Some do not like that, some do (for instance, it is not too much of a stretch to imagine a fighter being able to fly with an item to combat flying monsters in a high fantasy game).
But again, taste is no indication whether the game itself is balanced. And the core game certainly is.

IF by eliminating all supernatural powers along with magic, them I see no point in keeping supernatural creatures at all (you know, no magic and stuff?) and you cut a lot of monsters from MM, making this a game of race A vs race B. While it can also be fun, it's not D&D anymore too.

Exactly! It is no longer the D&D envisioned by the rules, but a - possibly interesting - campaign that uses D&D rules with some severe imbalances resulting (and needing to be addressed).
The same for a campaign without magic items.

Guys, do not think a game system is unbalanced simply because when you remove a certain aspect of the game it is no longer balanced.

- Giacomo

Yukitsu

2009-09-06, 01:45 PM

Which thread was this particular issue last discussed? I believe I gave a complete and comprehensive answer on the implications of that line of thinking in that thread, and have no particular desire to rebuke it anew.

Eldariel

2009-09-06, 01:49 PM

No, they do not. Polymorph is based on alter self. Alter self explicitly excludes the ability to get more attacks due to more limbs of the body. Polymorph does not alter this explicit rule and only grants on top of alter self more types to choose from, then DEX, STR, CON (though not for hp purposes) and extraordinary attacks. The ability to move and attack with all heads, and also attacking with all heads is not listed among the extraordinary attacks (ex) of the hydra.
And even IF (a big IF) the interpretation of the spell is controversial, why then go for the broken interpretation?

You can attack with all heads. Natural Attacks are listed as something you gain from Polymorph and a Hydra has 12 Bite natural attacks. Alter Self grants it too. From Alter Self (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/alterSelf.htm):
"You acquire the physical qualities of the new form while retaining your own mind. Physical qualities include natural size, mundane movement capabilities (such as burrowing, climbing, walking, swimming, and flight with wings, to a maximum speed of 120 feet for flying or 60 feet for nonflying movement), natural armor bonus, natural weapons (such as claws, bite, and so on), racial skill bonuses, racial bonus feats, and any gross physical qualities (presence or absence of wings, number of extremities, and so forth). A body with extra limbs does not allow you to make more attacks (or more advantageous two-weapon attacks) than normal."

You're misinterpreting the last line: It simply means you can't basically multiweapon fight even if you turned into a 4-armed creature. As it explicitly grants you all the natural weapons of the creature and you can always attack with all natural weapons in a full-attack, there's really little unclarify in that regard. Also note how you gain racial bonus feats; you gain the Hydra's bonus Combat Reflexes, which is stated to allow an AoO with each head.

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-06, 01:56 PM

You can attack with all heads. Natural Attacks are listed as something you gain from Polymorph and a Hydra has 12 Bite natural attacks. Alter Self grants it too. From Alter Self (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/alterSelf.htm):
"You acquire the physical qualities of the new form while retaining your own mind. Physical qualities include natural size, mundane movement capabilities (such as burrowing, climbing, walking, swimming, and flight with wings, to a maximum speed of 120 feet for flying or 60 feet for nonflying movement), natural armor bonus, natural weapons (such as claws, bite, and so on), racial skill bonuses, racial bonus feats, and any gross physical qualities (presence or absence of wings, number of extremities, and so forth). A body with extra limbs does not allow you to make more attacks (or more advantageous two-weapon attacks) than normal."
.

I bolded the more relevant passage for you.:smallsmile:

- Giacomo

Edit: The hydra does not get the feat combat reflexes as a class feature, it only gets a special racial application when it has it.

Doc Roc

2009-09-06, 01:57 PM

The hydra's attacks are bite attacks. It even says so. So specific trumps general and you get them.

Eldariel

2009-09-06, 01:58 PM

I bolded the more relevant passage for you.:smallsmile:

- Giacomo

I already covered that. To quote myself:
"You're misinterpreting the last line: It simply means you can't basically multiweapon fight even if you turned into a 4-armed creature. As it explicitly grants you all the natural weapons of the creature and you can always attack with all natural weapons in a full-attack, there's really little unclarify in that regard. Also note how you gain racial bonus feats; you gain the Hydra's bonus Combat Reflexes, which is stated to allow an AoO with each head."

Sir Giacomo

2009-09-06, 02:01 PM

The hydra's attacks are bite attacks. It even says so. So specific trumps general and you get them.

Yes, you get its bite attack (and are thus not considered non-proficient with it). But not more attacks than you would normally have (as a character, i.e. you just use your normal BAB).

- Giacomo

HamHam

2009-09-06, 02:03 PM

Yes, you get its bite attack (and are thus not considered non-proficient with it). But not more attacks than you would normally have (as a character, i.e. you just use your normal BAB).

- Giacomo

The hydra has a number of natural weapons equal to the number of heads it has. You gain them all. They are all primary natural weapons, and can thus all be used at once at the same BAB.

Sinfire Titan

2009-09-06, 02:10 PM

Ozymandias9

2009-09-06, 02:13 PM

Yes, you get its bite attack (and are thus not considered non-proficient with it). But not more attacks than you would normally have (as a character, i.e. you just use your normal BAB).

Yes, but you still have the natural weapon.

We need here to distinguish between primary natural weapons and secondary natural weapons. The use of a primary natural weapon supplants the normal use of a primary weapon, with appropriate adjustments made for nonstandard BAB progression on full attack. A secondary natural weapon is used like an off-hand attack, with relevant penalties defaulting to -4.

Much like your Wizard could attack with a secondary weapon at a penalty, he can also attack with secondary natural weapons at a penalty. He doesn't substitute the creature's full attack, but he is entitled to use secondary weapons provided at the standard penalty, just as he would make an off-hand attack with the second end of a quarter staff.

In this case, unless I'm greatly mistaken, the bite attack is a primary natural weapon. So the point is moot.

So it takes you 5 gaming sessions to get through one in game day?

Generally about 4 hours of play per game/day in those kind of situations. There are also sessions at the same table that are extremely encounter light and focus more on role-playing and collective story-telling. There we generally cover several days in the same time.

15 rounds? Are they facing some kind of army each combat?

Generally at least a portion there of. Even if the PCs themselves aren't part of a military, I generally stage overall conflict with a very martial background. I tend to attack them with higher numbers of somewhat lower level NPCs, mostly with NPC classes. They're generally attacking an enemy stronghold or engaged in battlefield combat. In the case of the former, they have to deal with both the guards at a initial enemies presented to begin the encounter and any patrols close enough to hear the sound of combat.

And that's practically impossible to do without a complete overhaul of the system anyway.

I also tend to, with the exception of actual battlefield combat, place them in indoor fighting areas that are, admittedly, a tad more labyrinthine than is realistic: they are generally in melee range of at least a portion of their enemies for a fight, and they usually get patrolling guards coming in mid fight to limit their ability to retreat to range. Unless they can hold a line, they generally face some pretty severe limitations on direct damage and field control AoE due to friendly fire.

It does, admittedly, do little to address enchantment school battle control imbalance: I have to weight the encounter a bit with that in mind from time to time-- I generally end up adding Dispel Magic to the Adept list, since they make up most of my nondescript NPC casters (I tend to be far more reserved on handing out PC classes). I'm also willing, if it seems necessary, to provide the NPCs with more pre-cast buffs that I would find strictly realistic.

HamHam

2009-09-06, 02:21 PM

Eldariel

2009-09-06, 02:24 PM

Yes, you get its bite attack (and are thus not considered non-proficient with it). But not more attacks than you would normally have (as a character, i.e. you just use your normal BAB).

- Giacomo

That statement simply means you cannot multiweapon fight. "You can't use extra limbs to gain more attacks..." Note how it doesn't talk about "natural attacks", just "attacks". Normally you can TWF with two weapons, but a 4-armed creature could MWF with 4 weapons. That limitation stops that. You can't wield more weapons than normal, nor can you e.g. wield two greatswords both in two hands.

The spell explicitly grants you the natural weapons and when you have natural weapons, they can all be used as one attack. Hydra (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/hydra.htm)'s natural weapon entries always include a number of Bites equal to the heads. So you get those. There's absolutely nothing unclear about this.

Sinfire Titan

2009-09-06, 02:30 PM

I bolded the more relevant passage for you.:smallsmile:

- Giacomo

Edit: The hydra does not get the feat combat reflexes as a class feature, it only gets a special racial application when it has it.

A head is not a limb. :smallbiggrin:

Philistine

2009-09-06, 02:36 PM

A Fighter can not fly, but a Wizard/Cleric/what ever the heck can and should be able to supply the rest of the party with magical support

We have a Barbarian and a Fighter in our current group - by themselves they are so so beat sticks but when the rest of us Buff them (Rest of us being a Cleric, Archivist and a Sorcerer) they go off in a big way.
OR...
... You could tell the Fighter player to play a Cleric or Druid and buff himself, while the current Cleric does the same, making the Team much, much stronger. I also have to wonder exactly what buffs the melee characters are getting, since - as Teron pointed out - most of the best buffs are caster-only. And really, this is the saddest thing: the Fighter class is strictly inferior to a buffed caster in combat, which is supposed to be his one area of strength.

Don't know about you but I'm playing a Team Game, if i have a strong character I'll be helping the less so strong team members so we can achieve what we set out to do rather than trying to win all the glory and limelight as a sole paragon - that is what CRPGs are for
Right. Do you think you could possibly sneer just a little more? It is possible to make mechanically and tactically sound choices at the gaming table without breaking character; and many people, possibly most people, do not play the game exactly the way you do, which does not mean that they're somehow sacrificing the Team Game aspect or Doing It Wrong.

So check your tone.

_____

There were, iirc, a few offers to go on a field and with conditions of a melee character's choice, but those offers were not picked up on.
A few? Many such gauntlets have been thrown down, over the course of many threads over a considerable period of time. Thrown down, but not picked up.

_____

What makes a class broken is that the casting classes are balanced around an expendable but regularly replenishing resource system, but rarely are rarely facing combat often enough to have those resources significantly taxed between replenishment.
That is, casting becomes broken in a campaign averaging 3-5 round combat 2-3 times a day.

I design encounters around a minimum of 15 rounds and 10-20 encounters per day (the range is because I generally design some to be avoidable). It makes spell conservation far more necessary and increases the value of healing. And that's still only 30 minutes of actual combat each day.
Fifteen encounters a day, roughly, at fifteen rounds each? They're clearly not dangerous encounters, or the melee characters would run out of HP long before the casters run out of spells. And there's still nothing in there that a Fighter can do which a buffed Cleric or Druid can't do as well or better, using hours/level or metamagic extended buffs.

Doc Roc

2009-09-06, 02:42 PM

I love how all of these discussions devolve into people yelling at me that fighters are great, yo! This is about where the game gives, not how any one of us is positively certain that your favorite class is the best class. Here's what I think makes a class broken:

The ability to repeatedly neutralize encounters single-handedly.
The ability to force choices on the opposition on a large scale.
The ability to, with good repeatability, leave other party members without a role.
A wider spread of options than other classes of a comparable level.
The ability to capitalize on these options reliably, on a tactical or strategic level.
A reduction of orthogonality in party roles.

Tehnar

2009-09-06, 02:54 PM

Tyndmyr

2009-09-06, 02:55 PM

The idea of high intensity combat days is not without merit, but having done some testing on that(a bit of which was last night, incidentally), it's very difficult to give that sort of combat meaning.

Combat effectiveness of opponents falls off very rapidly when CRs are lower than the party. There are a great number of spells that are very efficient at cleaning up large numbers of mobs, if you have a hit die advantage over them, for example.

Another problem area is wands. In practice, it's not unusual for a primary caster to be packing a wand with either their most frequently used, or most least used spells(depending on philosophy w regards to wands). This enables them to greatly extend their effective day. Many buff spells can be cast at a low CL, keeping wand prices reasonable.

But anyhow, any encounter that is threatening enough to deplete the wizard's resources significantly should also be able to deplete the melee resource, hp and anything with use/day on it as well. This is a big problem for late in the day fighting unless you carry a *lot* of CLW wands, potions, etc.

Doc Roc

2009-09-06, 02:56 PM

Roderick_BR

2009-09-06, 02:57 PM

As written, Core IS balanced - if you play the way the game was playtested, which means blaster wizards, healbot clerics, damage/tank fighters, and sneaky thieves. The problem is, they didn't bother to balance the parts which allow certain classes to play in ways they weren't tested for - the Divine Power/Divine Favor/Righteous Might combo for the Cleric, for instance, which gives it as much HP as the fighter, the same base attack, +3 bonus to attack/damage, and a size increase. Or the Wizard who focuses on battlefield control, using Grease to make anything in armor unable to move, or drops save-or-suck spells targeting a foe's weakest save.

It doesn't even need to be a combo. For example, the aforementioned cleric, he can buff a fighter to kingdom come... but if he decides to buff himself, he can use self-only buffs that makes him better than other meelers. I mean, apparently no playtester ever thought about casting Divine Power with those other buffing spells in place of casting Greater Magic Weapon and Bear's Strentgh on the fighter.
And apparently, no one there playing a wizard stopped to think "why should I memorize this fireball to deal a few damage to an enemy instead of using Hold Person on him? Hey, look, a spell that target 75% of my enemie's low will, that'll kill them instantly, instead of dealing 10% of their HP in damage. I'll memorize if several times (and this one spell for this unlikely guy with resistance to death spells)."

mostlyharmful

2009-09-06, 03:04 PM

There's also the problem of long lasting stuff that leaves the caster fully able to grind all day long, alter self (rod of Extend), overland flight, phantom steed, Wildshape and basic druid buff suite, DMM clerics and planer bound minions, shapechange and superior invisibility, etc....

Not to mention if that's the style the DM likes any caster will be picking up a reserve feat, layering the self buffs and blasting from safety. all day long.

also wands, staves, scrolls as has been mentioned.

Next, you've got the problem that casters have options as far as tactical and strategic movement is concerned that meleers just don't, phantom steed, teleport, planeshift, etc... mean if the encounter can be circumvented then it's probably casters that are doing so, if the encounter is too much it's casters that get away and if the encounter is the twenty seventh of the day it's casters that are able to just retreat, recharge and start back again.

After that you've got the problem of safety when recharging, casters can just leave and come back when they feel like it, Clerics get planeshift at level 9 and a built in homebase to hole up in, Wizards can be cozyily sleeping from level 3 with a rod of extend and Druids can turn into a damn fish and escape to the bottom of a lake for 9 hours or whatever. How's a mundane charater supposed to catch up?

The only way you've got that might work is to give the players a time constraint or a defensive task and if EVERY senario that challenges your casters falls into one of those it says something. Even more so if they just start preping long term buffs and refuse to spend all their slots on healing the meatshield.

Kelpstrand

2009-09-06, 03:06 PM

Actually to my best knowledge, of revised rules regarding polymorph (and there have been more then a few revisions), the latest states that except for keeping its hp, and HD for purposes of adjudicating effects the polymorphed character is replaced with the creature he polymorphed into.

So in the example above the entire party would be replaced by hydras straight from the MM including the 2 INT, lack of spellcasting, etc. However they would have fast healing and multiple natural attacks, etc.

Polymorph subschool does not work that way!

They decided to write new polymorph spells that work that way. They decided it was easier to tell people that the polymorph subschool is a replacement spell and that unless a spell specifies otherwise:

You lose "everything"
You gain "everything"

This was so they didn't need to reprint it in every single new "Trollform" or "Eye Tyrant" or "Shape of the Chimera" spell.

It has no bearing on alter self/polymorph/shapechange/PaO/Animal Shapes because:

Alter Self: "you retain...
You keep...
You gain...
You lose..."

Polymorph "As alter self, except..."
PaO: "As polymorph except..."
Shapechange: "As polymorph except..."

All of these spells state explicitly what you gain and what you lose and what you keep. Therefore, the polymorph subschool ruling has no bearing on what you keep gain and lose.

The spell specifies otherwise, so Polymorph subschool replacements do not apply.

Ozymandias9

2009-09-06, 03:29 PM

I don't see how that fixes anything. A bunch of lower level NPCs are cannon fodder for a summons. And they probably can't even hit the Wizard (or any of the PCs for that matter). Or Wall of Stone. Or Solid Fog. Or whatever.

They're not that much lower, just enough so that a full BAB class in plate will expect to land more hits than are landed upon them by a given NPC warrior in plate. And the PCs aren't always fighting alone. I have little issue with summoning: its a reasonable and effective strategy for the situation. It doesn't really redress targeted range damage on the more vulnerable party members.

Trying to cordon off the enemies with a Wall of Stone is a different matter. Its a perfectly acceptable solution in the short term, but it also gives them greater opportunity to get aid and/or raise the alarm for the rest of the stronghold. It also brings the issue of what happens if the enemies are attacking from the direction you need to travel.

As to Solid Fog, I also pointed out that I tend to force rather short range battles. I also try to add patrols from different directions: retreating to range isn't always an option, and they are likely to get at least some of the party in the area of effect.

Holy Word and the like has caused some issue in the past, but they have a lot encounters per day and this group tend to prefer campaigns that top out in the mid-teens.

Fifteen encounters a day, roughly, at fifteen rounds each? They're clearly not dangerous encounters, or the melee characters would run out of HP long before the casters run out of spells. And there's still nothing in there that a Fighter can do which a buffed Cleric or Druid can't do as well or better, using hours/level or metamagic extended buffs.

It's a 6 person party that generally runs 2 clerics (both of whom really enjoy healing), some flavor of archer (he's a bit impulsive and dies a lot, so it changes: ranger, ranged fighter, ranged rogue, etc), a S-n-Board fighter, a rogue, and a wizard. The Clerics general run through the vast majority of their spells healing the others. I run almost exclusively core, where there aren't honestly a lot of hour/level buffs. If the clerics spend many spells on offense, someone will die in a later encounter. That's difficult enough for me.

I will readily admit, however, that a druid would be more problematic. Their imbalances are far less dependent on failing to reach the limits of a limited resource spell system and more on the issue of the balance of wild shape.

HamHam

2009-09-06, 03:53 PM

They're not that much lower, just enough so that a full BAB class in plate will expect to land more hits than are landed upon them by a given NPC warrior in plate. And the PCs aren't always fighting alone. I have little issue with summoning: its a reasonable and effective strategy for the situation.

It's as single spell capable of handling an entire encounter. If the fighter can beat the however many NPCs, so can a summon.

It doesn't really redress targeted range damage on the more vulnerable party members.

Protection from arrows is a core hour per level buff. Wind Wall is a second level spell.

It's a 6 person party that generally runs 2 clerics (both of whom really enjoy healing), a ranger, a S-n-Board fighter, a rogue, and a wizard. The Clerics general run through the vast majority of their spells healing the others. I run almost exclusively core, where there aren't honestly a lot of hour/level buffs. If the clerics spend many spells on offense, someone will die in a later encounter. That's difficult enough for me.

Didn't we already establish on like the second page that heal-bot clerics are balanced because that's what they actually playtested for?

olentu

2009-09-06, 03:57 PM

Polymorph subschool does not work that way!

They decided to write new polymorph spells that work that way. They decided it was easier to tell people that the polymorph subschool is a replacement spell and that unless a spell specifies otherwise:

You lose "everything"
You gain "everything"

This was so they didn't need to reprint it in every single new "Trollform" or "Eye Tyrant" or "Shape of the Chimera" spell.

It has no bearing on alter self/polymorph/shapechange/PaO/Animal Shapes because:

Alter Self: "you retain...
You keep...
You gain...
You lose..."

Polymorph "As alter self, except..."
PaO: "As polymorph except..."
Shapechange: "As polymorph except..."

All of these spells state explicitly what you gain and what you lose and what you keep. Therefore, the polymorph subschool ruling has no bearing on what you keep gain and lose.

The spell specifies otherwise, so Polymorph subschool replacements do not apply.

Actually if I am recalling it correctly the polymorph subschool change did eventually allow for natural abilities to be gained by the polymorph line.

Arakune

2009-09-06, 04:18 PM

Exactly! It is no longer the D&D envisioned by the rules, but a - possibly interesting - campaign that uses D&D rules with some severe imbalances resulting (and needing to be addressed).
The same for a campaign without magic items.

- Giacomo

Now you completely missed the point. The whole point of D&D is to get a handful of people to go kill the dragon and explore dungeons, not an army to kill the monsters.

Edit: I almost fell to a massive trap! damn ¬¬

Ozymandias9

2009-09-06, 04:24 PM

It's as single spell capable of handling an entire encounter. If the fighter can beat the however many NPCs, so can a summon.

Not really. Those summons take up space. If, say, one Celestial Blackbear takes the place of the fighter on the front line then the fighter is free to take up a ranged weapon and deal with enemies further back. If the Celestial Blackbear was placed behind the line, its more or less worthless. If its placed forward, it merely creates a second front and allows the enemy warriors further back to kill instead of attacking from range.

Protection from arrows is a core hour per level buff. Wind Wall is a second level spell. The former provides no protection against magical arrows or enemy casters, who are defending a post rather then attacking a stronghold. They have little issue with using all their Spells per Day allotment. The later precludes most ranged activity from your teammates unless you restrict the wall to surrounding one person.

Didn't we already establish on like the second page that heal-bot clerics are balanced because that's what they actually playtested for?
Yes, so provide heavy incentive to heal. *eyeroll*

More seriously, if you're having issues with a cleric taking the role of sword and board, then you need to make it more difficult for them to keep the enemy in place. If you provide the opportunity to restrict battlefields appropriately, a warrior has plenty of capacity to stand their ground and hold back the majority of an enemy force. Even in core there are a surprising number of ways to use basic feats to control a battle in limited spaces: its pretty much what the entire combat experience tree is designed for. A cleric has to burn spells per day to get the same effect, and thus its merely a matter of reaching the right balance of spells per encounter and encounters per day.

If you're having issue with them taking the damage dealing role, then they can usually be taken care of through the same kind of draw on spells per day as mages and sorcerers: Clericzilla is far less of an issue if you restrict to core, where long lasting offensive buffs are relatively rare: while they have greater nova capacity and control than a rogue by far, their sustained damage capacity is more limited if you can force resource management onto their spells per day.

HamHam

2009-09-06, 06:46 PM

Not really. Those summons take up space. If, say, one Celestial Blackbear takes the place of the fighter on the front line then the fighter is free to take up a ranged weapon and deal with enemies further back. If the Celestial Blackbear was placed behind the line, its more or less worthless. If its placed forward, it merely creates a second front and allows the enemy warriors further back to kill instead of attacking from range.

What? The point is the Fighter doesn't need to be there because the summon can handle it. The fighter does not fulfill a party role that cannot be replaced by the wizard casting one spell.

The former provides no protection against magical arrows or enemy casters, who are defending a post rather then attacking a stronghold. They have little issue with using all their Spells per Day allotment. The later precludes most ranged activity from your teammates unless you restrict the wall to surrounding one person.

Let's be generous and give these NPC warriors npc fighter gear. That means they will have a +1 weapon at level 7. Before that, they are completely ineffective against the wizard. And afterwards too, because at 8th level you have enough 2nd level spells to just cast Wind Wall over and over again as necessary.

Enemy casters? You know who won't help against that? The non-casters.

Yes, so provide heavy incentive to heal. *eyeroll*

Such as? It's not my problem if the fighter keeps dieing. I'm not going to waste my time healing him every round. I'm gonna go smite some heavens with my divine might. Maybe he'll eventually figure out that he should play a character that can carry his own weight.

More seriously, if you're having issues with a cleric taking the role of sword and board, then you need to make it more difficult for them to keep the enemy in place.

What? Any caster is infinitely better at battle field control than any non-caster in core.

Ozymandias9

2009-09-06, 07:41 PM

What? Any caster is infinitely better at battle field control than any non-caster in core.

Only if you treat spells per day as an unlimited resource: once again when you place a significant enough draw on spells per day through protracted and plentiful encounters, you run up against the fact that the fighter's feats can be used without limit and the spells cannot.

To quote myself:

A cleric has to burn spells per day to get the same effect, and thus its merely a matter of reaching the right balance of spells per encounter and encounters per day.

... valid point about NPCs having +1 arrows early on... statment about recasting wind wall ad infinitum

Once again, the underlying point is the strength of spells can be (and in fact is designed to be) offset by limits on spells per day. Remember, I'm talking about 200 rounds of combat before they get to replenish spells, not 50. Even at level 20, that's 10 applications of wind wall. Setting aside for the sake of hyperbole extend spell, a level 20 wizard would need an Int of 58 to have that many second level spell slots.

Only if you treat spells per day health as an unlimited resource: once again when you place a significant enough draw on spells per day through protracted and plentiful encounters, you run up against the fact that the fighter's feats can be used without limit and the spells their health cannot.

Cute. But I operate under the presumption of healing. I by no means presume that every person playing a class that can heal will (unless, of course, they demonstrate that they prefer to). But i do generally presume that the party will work together and that there is a healer present.

Put another way, if there is only one healing-capable class and they burn spells per day on damage and are out by round 100, then I would expect a TPK in the remaining 100+ rounds of combat that day. If instead they conserve spells and, err on the side of simple melee attacks and heal as necessary, they might make it through the 200 or so rounds with enough spells per day left to contribute in some fashion to the boss fight at the end.

Arbitrarity

2009-09-06, 07:44 PM

Kesnit

2009-09-06, 07:59 PM

Such as? It's not my problem if the fighter keeps dieing. I'm not going to waste my time healing him every round. I'm gonna go smite some heavens with my divine might. Maybe he'll eventually figure out that he should play a character that can carry his own weight.

Some people just don't like playing casters (or primary casters). Do they deserve to be punished because of their playing preferences?

Arakune

2009-09-06, 08:03 PM

Only if you treat spells per day as an unlimited resource: once again when you place a significant enough draw on spells per day through protracted and plentiful encounters, you run up against the fact that the fighter's feats can be used without limit and the spells cannot.

The only thing you showed is that to chalenge a wizard you need to put your non-casters in a deadly danger by facing them with an small army.

Wealth is finite and HP is finite. The non-casters need a lot of healing unless they are praticaly unafected by your enemies attacks, in this case the caster doesn't need to waste his doom spells and can hang around behind the meat shield just fine.

For all anti-army problems a caster may have, some wands with this (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mnemonicEnhancer.htm) may help every now and them.

Some people just don't like playing casters (or primary casters). Do they deserve to be punished because of their playing preferences?

Of course not, but when it's the system who start to do that...

Edit: Ninjad! Sort of.

Starbuck_II

2009-09-06, 08:03 PM

The D&D Designers said yes. This was due to rewarding system mastery. Casters have a higher reward than non-casters.

HamHam

2009-09-06, 08:07 PM

Some people just don't like playing casters (or primary casters). Do they deserve to be punished because of their playing preferences?

No. Which is why the system needs to be fixed. Because it is broken as-is.

Pharaoh's Fist

2009-09-06, 08:07 PM

Some people just don't like playing casters (or primary casters). Do they deserve to be punished because of their playing preferences?

Some people don't like to play healbots. Should they be punished for their playing preferences?

sofawall

2009-09-06, 08:10 PM

Only if you treat spells per day as an unlimited resource: once again when you place a significant enough draw on spells per day through protracted and plentiful encounters, you run up against the fact that the fighter's feats can be used without limit and the spells cannot.

To quote myself:

Hmm... Divine Power and Freedom of Movement. Bam, 2 spell slots. You're better than a fighter, stat-wise. Feat-wise, well, Fighters always win there, it's kind of their schtick.

And as for Battlefield control, let's say I use two spells of 4th level and up every encounter. At level 20, with a wis of 34 (most full casters get 34 casting stat, sometimes 36, rarely 38), how many encounters can I run through? Looks like 17.

A Fighter, at level 20, with 36 con (very high, more likely to be 32, but we'll go with it) will have 374 hp. They will need to lose, on average, only 15 hp per encounter to remain viable with the Cleric. How much damage does a 20th level creature do? Let's see, a Balor. 2d6+13. Oh look, one hit and you're at your HP ration. Pit Fiend? 2d8+23. Again, one attack out of a full routine, plus spell-likes. Black Wyrm? 4d6+132. Ouch. He did more than your ration, in one of his many attacks.

HP is just as limited as spells, my friend.

(Cleric with 22 con (14+2dwarf+6 item) has 308 hp, but with all his 0-3 level spells, I reckon you could increase your effective HP total much, much higher.)

Ozymandias9

2009-09-06, 08:19 PM

Some people don't like to play healbots. Should they be punished for their playing preferences?

No, I have no problem with someone playing an offensively built cleric. But I presume that there will be someone healing and will encourage the party to work something out before the campaign begins no one has taken the role.

HP is just as limited as spells, my friend.

But can be replenished on a shorter scale through spells. Once again, I presume that there is a healer, though not that every cleric or druid will be healing.

And as for Battlefield control, let's say I use two spells of 4th level and up every encounter. At level 20, with a wis of 34 (most full casters get 34 casting stat, sometimes 36, rarely 38), how many encounters can I run through? Looks like 17.
That spell consumption rate is about what I would aim to encourage for a control or offensive caster, though usually with the use of lower spells added in. But remember that that won't be enough to win the whole encounter We're talking an aim of 15 rounds, scaled assuming that every offensive or control caster is casting that often. Meanwhile the warrior has 15 rounds to use his feats and the rogue has 15 rounds to use his sneak attacks, ect.