PDA

View Full Version : What classes/combos/books are broken?



rezplz
2009-09-06, 01:07 PM
So after that lovely TPK, it's my turn to be DM for a while and they're all making new characters. After a bit of thought I decided to enforce the multiclass penalty to EXP (not counting prestige classes) so that should prevent a lot of the class dipping which seems to be common among optimizers. But really, the thing that I'm worried about is I don't want one of my players to accidentally pick something that's overpowered or broken. Most of my group hasn't opened most non-core books and we're not much into optimizing either. (at levels 10-12 the TWF fighter was just as useful as the wizard, to give you an idea of our lack of optimization).


So, if you would be so kind, give me a quick breakdown of what to avoid and why. Classes, books, spells, etc. Thanks much.

Yuki Akuma
2009-09-06, 01:11 PM
Most things only get particularly broken when people try to break them. If your group isn't much for optimizing, there's really nothing to worry about.

kamikasei
2009-09-06, 01:15 PM
The risk that someone will pick something cripplingly bad is much higher than that they'll accidentally be too powerful. Just look at what they pick as they pick it and if you're not confident judging it yourself, run it by the hive mind boards first.

Incidentally, I would advise against enforcing multiclassing penalties. That won't hurt the most powerful options, only the unusual ones.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-06, 01:17 PM
So after that lovely TPK, it's my turn to be DM for a while and they're all making new characters. After a bit of thought I decided to enforce the multiclass penalty to EXP (not counting prestige classes) so that should prevent a lot of the class dipping which seems to be common among optimizers.
Druid 20
Cleric 20
Wizard 20
Sorcerer 20
Archivist 20
Artificer 20
Beguiler 20
Warblade 20
Swordsage 20
Crusader 20

rezplz
2009-09-06, 01:25 PM
Druid 20
Cleric 20
Wizard 20
Sorcerer 20
Archivist 20
Artificer 20
Beguiler 20
Warblade 20
Swordsage 20
Crusader 20

Touche


And cool, I guess it IS best to handle it on a case-by-case basis. One specific thing I did have a question about was ToB. I don't know anything about it, but those classes, out-of-the-box... would they easily outshine other people in the group who don't optimize? I just remember one group I did, someone saw swordsage and liked the flavor, so he chose it. And if I remember correctly, he was effectively able to do a burning hands every encounter in addition to an attack, and even though it was not what was intended, the swordsage could basically say "screw you Wizard, I'm way better than you." Which seemed odd to me. D:

Myou
2009-09-06, 01:26 PM
The one class that's really broken almost no matter what you do is Druid. Ban the druid, or at least allow only the shapeshift variant from the PHB2.

Cleric is also very overpowered if you know even a little about how to use it. Just using core spells only you're a better fighter than the fighter.

Wizard takes more work to break, so non-optimisers probably won't have a problem there (until really high levels).


Ignore Pharaoh's Fist, Beguilers, Warblades, Swordsages and Crusaders are fine. :smallsigh:

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0

Roukon
2009-09-06, 01:29 PM
I personally agree with Yuki Akuma. If your group is not the type to optimize, then you should be all right. Also, if the entire group is going to optimize (DM included) then it is not so bad either, just a bit harder to challange the players. But, if one (or two) player is the type to optimize and the rest are not, then you get into trouble. I have had that happen, and unfortunetly the game was a lot less fun for a few of my players than it should have been. I think they had the most fun when they were in a situation where they were seperated from the optimizer and he had no magic and was almost killed. (I guess fate didn't want him to die, because had he gone into a different random room, he would have died.)

It really depends on how your group does things. If you are concerned, then I would recommend that you have your players make up their sheets and let you look at them for at least a week (and by that I mean a week where you can really look at them, instead of just glancing over them for major discrepencies). What I plan to do for any future games I DM is tell my players right away that I do not suffer optimizers at all, and will prohibit anything I see that I feel is optimized. I'll add that if something gets past me, and I find later that it is optimized, I will find some way of changing it. Hopefully you won't have to worry about that.

Roukon

kamikasei
2009-09-06, 01:30 PM
Ignore Pharaoh's Fist, Beguilers, Warblades, Swordsages and Crusaders are fine. :smallsigh:

But are very good without any dips, which I think was his point.

ToB: Well, if the wizard is using burning hands, the swordsage is going to do better than him, yes.

On your wider question, ToB along with some other classes (Beguilers are the obvious ones that spring to mind) are out of the box optimized, in that it's hard to make them bad with innocently-made choices. They will generally outperform core melee classes which aren't carefully built, yes. My advice would be to encourage everyone to use it rather than ban it, though, specifically because it gives everyone a higher baseline of usefulness.


What I plan to do for any future games I DM is tell my players right away that I do not suffer optimizers at all, and will prohibit anything I see that I feel is optimized. I'll add that if something gets past me, and I find later that it is optimized, I will find some way of changing it.

Either that's extremely harsh, or you're using an unusual definition of "optimize".

Just have your players collaborate on chargen, so that they can calibrate their power levels to one another, the more system-knowledgeable dialing it back a bit as necessary or helping the less mechanically-minded find more efficient ways of realizing their concepts.

rezplz
2009-09-06, 01:37 PM
Myou: I've heard some bad things about the druid, but nobody seems to play them so I think we'll be fine with that. As for the cleric, unless if they have access to divine metamagic and persist, wouldn't they have to waste the first round or two buffing themselves up?

Roukon: That's a good idea, I think I'll try that. But as I have no life until I start working again on the 21st, I should be able to get that done in a day or two.

kamikasei: Encouraging people to use it is one idea, but that would require somehow getting the book on my computer and reading the classes beforehand. I might see what I can do, though. (And the wizard wasn't using burning hands, but was a low-level summoner wizard. His badgers didn't do a whole lot...)

kjones
2009-09-06, 01:39 PM
I personally agree with Yuki Akuma. If your group is not the type to optimize, then you should be all right. Also, if the entire group is going to optimize (DM included) then it is not so bad either, just a bit harder to challange the players. But, if one (or two) player is the type to optimize and the rest are not, then you get into trouble. I have had that happen, and unfortunetly the game was a lot less fun for a few of my players than it should have been. I think they had the most fun when they were in a situation where they were seperated from the optimizer and he had no magic and was almost killed. (I guess fate didn't want him to die, because had he gone into a different random room, he would have died.)

It really depends on how your group does things. If you are concerned, then I would recommend that you have your players make up their sheets and let you look at them for at least a week (and by that I mean a week where you can really look at them, instead of just glancing over them for major discrepencies). What I plan to do for any future games I DM is tell my players right away that I do not suffer optimizers at all, and will prohibit anything I see that I feel is optimized. I'll add that if something gets past me, and I find later that it is optimized, I will find some way of changing it. Hopefully you won't have to worry about that.

Roukon

I, too, am curious as to what definition of "optimize" you're working with here. Is a fighter taking Power Attack as his 1st level feat optimizing? It is more or less the "optimal" choice at that point.

I think the word you're thinking of is "powergaming" or "munchkining". Unless you want your players to play nothing but blaster wizards, healbot clerics, TWF fighters, and monks.

Myou
2009-09-06, 01:41 PM
Myou: I've heard some bad things about the druid, but nobody seems to play them so I think we'll be fine with that. As for the cleric, unless if they have access to divine metamagic and persist, wouldn't they have to waste the first round or two buffing themselves up?

Roukon: That's a good idea, I think I'll try that. But as I have no life until I start working again on the 21st, I should be able to get that done in a day or two.

kamikasei: Encouraging people to use it is one idea, but that would require somehow getting the book on my computer and reading the classes beforehand. I might see what I can do, though. (And the wizard wasn't using burning hands, but was a low-level summoner wizard. His badgers didn't do a whole lot...)

Well, no, they'd just use spells with longer durations. It makes them less broken, but still broken.

I'm with kamikasei on character creation.

I'm a real powergamer, but I help whoever I play with make powerful characters, and restrain myself when needed. Any good player does.

kamikasei
2009-09-06, 01:45 PM
kamikasei: Encouraging people to use it is one idea, but that would require somehow getting the book on my computer and reading the classes beforehand. I might see what I can do, though. (And the wizard wasn't using burning hands, but was a low-level summoner wizard. His badgers didn't do a whole lot...)

It is always, always always always, a good-bordering-on-mandatory idea to familiarize yourself as DM with any material before a player uses it. Especially when it comes to "subsystems" like ToB, psionics, or Incarnum. So let me strongly caution against approving anything from ToB before you have the chance to look over the system fully.

(Mind, this depends on the scale of the material. A single feat or spell, just get the player to show you the text first. But as a general rule, simply don't approve anything sight unseen. This is not because you should be a control freak as a DM, but because you should know what your players' characters are capable of.)

As far as the wizard, a low-level summoner is not much better than a blaster. In that the summons are not great, only last a short while and you don't have much ability to buff them. The swordsage will become relatively weaker as time passes, since the wizard will get stronger effects and fire-based damage will become weaker for two reasons at once.

Indon
2009-09-06, 01:47 PM
A Druid might stumble into being more powerful than the party members, but aside from that, you're not likely to see anyone accidentally becoming much more powerful than the rest of the party, unless they go for a concept which just happens to be powerful.

A couple of those:

-Charging/Power Attack Lance Paladin
-Battlefield Control Wizard
-Combatant Cleric (with heavy metamagic use)

Those are examples that come to mind as being both conceivable by a non-optimizer and coincidentally also quite powerful.

SparkMandriller
2009-09-06, 01:47 PM
What I plan to do for any future games I DM is tell my players right away that I do not suffer optimizers at all, and will prohibit anything I see that I feel is optimized.

Must be hard playing a wizard if you're not allowed to have an intelligence high enough to cast spells.