PDA

View Full Version : Wizard vs Fighter Mk II: You're All Doing It Wrong



JonestheSpy
2009-10-27, 08:01 PM
For some reason, this whole topic has bugged the boop outa me, probably because it brings out the most obnoxious of the optimization-obsessed, rules lawyering type of discussion one sees in gaming circles, as well as adolescent "my character can beat up your character" silliness. I confess to joining in a bit, mostly because I found some people's assertions that one class could so easily defeat another that is many many levels higher was just annoying.

Anyway, all these discussions totally miss the point. Yes, it's true, a wizard with all their spells available will defeat most level-equivalent enemies, but assuming that makes them so vastly better as a class is pretty simplistic thinking.

Instead of assuming an arena-style duel, put both a (Core only please) fighter and a wizard through the same challenge, a fairly typical dungeon crawl type of scenario. Assume five to seven encounters that are unknown to each character, of the type that's challenging but that the character would have a pretty good odds of winning unless they do something stupid or have a string of bad luck. The encounters take place in typical dungeon-style chambers, meaning ranging in size from 20 by 20 to 100 by 100 feet with ceilings that aren't all that high unless the chamber contains particularly big creatures. And as you're progressing along the tunnels connecting the rooms there's somewhere between a 5 to 15 minute gap between encounters. There's enough healing potions or whatever to bring the charcters up to most of their hit points twice. And there's a time limit of some sort that precludes the option of retreating and coming back later - either the princess is going to be sacrificed at midnight, or the complex will use the time to reinforce and make its defenses much, much stronger.

I think all of the above should not strike anyone as unusual for a typical adventure scenario. And I think it should be pretty obvious that in such a situation a wizard does not dominate the way it would in a straight-up duel.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-27, 08:04 PM
And I think it should be pretty obvious that in such a situation a wizard does not dominate the way it would in a straight-up duel.
Perhaps you should run the test and draw conclusions based on actual, empirical evidence.

Oslecamo
2009-10-27, 08:07 PM
That sheet you had just a second ago it's not a wizard. It's a wizard+prc. Is the fighter also allowed to multiclass here?

Myou
2009-10-27, 08:07 PM
5-7 encounters a day isn't really normal, the game was built around 4 equal level encounters a day, and I doubt many players will face 7 in a single day.

In any case, who cares about solo ability? People don't normally play D&D alone, and when the do then inter-class balance doesn't matter.

If you want to be realistic it should be a party test.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-27, 08:09 PM
That sheet you had just a second ago it's not a wizard. It's a wizard+prc. Is the fighter also allowed to multiclass here?

So a wizard going into a wizard prc is not allowed, because...?

AstralFire
2009-10-27, 08:11 PM
Sorry Jonesy, but the thing of it is, the Wizard really will dominate that just about as well when played by someone like Pharoah's Fist who actually engages in that mindset. (Not a knock on PF - he's a very witty guy and he seems pleasant enough past the humorous façade. :) )

Someone like me? I can't get the Wizard to play like that. I just can't be arsed to spend that much effort on playing like that, and it doesn't come as easy to me as others. Especially not when my preferred method of dealing with problems is attacking them with fire.

And I think most players are more like me, or even less optimization minded, which is probably the basis for your assertion in the topic post. So for all practical purposes - the Wizard is not quite so far above the Fighter it can be giving one seven levels higher than it a run for his money. But for the purposes of discussing game balance, discussing something at its upper limits by masters of optimization play is valuable, even if not the sole consideration that should be had.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-27, 08:12 PM
Oh my god, it's AstralFire!

Mushroom Ninja
2009-10-27, 08:12 PM
Solo dungeon-crawling is especially harsh on fighters since they lack skill points and easy-access utility spells.

Flayerman
2009-10-27, 08:12 PM
Unfortunately what I expect you'll find is that the fighter can't put out enough damage to sustain his own survivability for long. Considering that, as others have said, D&D is a party game, a test in a vacuum is meaningless; the problem is that a 17th-level wizard, or even 14th-ish, can bend reality to his will in ways the fighter never can.

The fighter hits things with his sword for 1d6+Strength+Power attack+magic bonus damage. Sure, he can do it three or four times a round, but the wizard only needs one or two rounds to clear the room.

It just doesn't compare, unfortunately.

Lycanthromancer
2009-10-27, 08:17 PM
Oh my god, it's AstralFire!

Screw the ninjas! I have Pharoah!

Thrice Dead Cat
2009-10-27, 08:18 PM
And there's a time limit of some sort that precludes the option of retreating and coming back later - either the princess is going to be sacrificed at midnight, or the complex will use the time to reinforce and make its defenses much, much stronger.

A time limit? Cute. Unless you're keeping this core and banning extraplanar travel, the wizard still doesn't care. The wizard can go "Oh, well, that took more out of me than I expected, better go back home for a few seconds and get my daily limit of spells back."

It's things like this that make the wizard more effective than the fighter. Because one is constrained by reality, whereas reality is constrained by the first.

Kurald Galain
2009-10-27, 08:22 PM
Oh, well, that took more out of me than I expected, better go back home for a few seconds and get my daily limit of spells back.
I don't think we need that amount of optimization for a test like this. As a DM I wouldn't allow such "time warps", but that doesn't reduce the power of a wizard by much. If you stay realistic, he should still win.

Milskidasith
2009-10-27, 08:25 PM
Instead of assuming an arena-style duel, put both a (Core only please) fighter and a wizard through the same challenge, a fairly typical dungeon crawl type of scenario. Assume five to seven encounters that are unknown to each character, of the type that's challenging but that the character would have a pretty good odds of winning unless they do something stupid or have a string of bad luck.

The game's based on 4 encounters a day, so a typical day isn't going to be seven. Unfavorable to both, since fighters HP runs out and so do spell slots, though depending on what level, spell slots will last as long as or longer than HP.

T
he encounters take place in typical dungeon-style chambers, meaning ranging in size from 20 by 20 to 100 by 100 feet with ceilings that aren't all that high unless the chamber contains particularly big creatures.

As opposed to having anything outside. While I can see some dungeon encounters, forcing all of them to play to the fighter's forte, I.E.. his enemies being too close to be able to avoid him, while playing to a wizard's weakness in close quarters. Crammed in a small box with an enemy for seven encounters works for melee, not so much for ranged, so an outdoor battle or two only seems fair.


And as you're progressing along the tunnels connecting the rooms there's somewhere between a 5 to 15 minute gap between encounters.

Conveniently long enough to eliminate any long term buffs from the wizard, though with Phantom Steed that becomes a sixteenth of that with a hustling phantom steed (or if you assume the characters are hustling, a 'mere' one eight of that.)


There's enough healing potions or whatever to bring the charcters up to most of their hit points twice.

WOAH WOAH WOAH. So the fighter gets to entirely restore his primary resource, HP, twice, while the wizard gets nothing? That's not testing if a fighter can beat a wizard, that's testing if three identical fighters can, playing tag team, beat a single wizard.


And there's a time limit of some sort that precludes the option of retreating and coming back later - either the princess is going to be sacrificed at midnight, or the complex will use the time to reinforce and make its defenses much, much stronger.


If it's a level 17+ crawl... Genesis makes time irrelevant.


I think all of the above should not strike anyone as unusual for a typical adventure scenario. And I think it should be pretty obvious that in such a situation a wizard does not dominate the way it would in a straight-up duel.

See the problems I pointed out. It's more encounters than a wizard is designed for, in environments that favor the fighter (100 feet by 100 feet is still too small to even make maximum use of medium ranged spells, and 20 feet by 20 is too small to even allow the wizard to avoid AoOs against larger foes, and low ceilings mean that the wizard can't use one of his primary advantages; the air. Plus, you know, you get three fighters worth of resources, and no "The wizard has enough potions of a super buffed Pnemonic Enhancer to recharge all of his spell slots, twice."

Stompy
2009-10-27, 08:27 PM
This topic sort of intrigues me. (even though I feel it's been done 10 times already)


That sheet you had just a second ago it's not a wizard. It's a wizard+prc. Is the fighter also allowed to multiclass here?

Sure, if it's core only! :smallbiggrin:

EDIT: What level ARE these people going to be, anyway?

Thrice Dead Cat
2009-10-27, 08:28 PM
I don't think we need that amount of optimization for a test like this. As a DM I wouldn't allow such "time warps", but that doesn't reduce the power of a wizard by much. If you stay realistic, he should still win.

Right. If a real wizard wanted to find the princess, the trick would be to do a quick scry before double teleporting in and out. Sure, most people would be smart enough to drop down some basic protections, but, assuming higher level play, going ethereal is a possible alternative.

The Big Dice
2009-10-27, 08:44 PM
Wizards really aren't the be all and end all that they get accused of being. Low hit points, poor BAB, bad synergy on their saves and stats, with a relatively low AC. Not to mention having to use high level spell slots to prepare their Metamagic. Plus having to spend a third of the day in complete rest conditions, with another hour on top of that to prepare for as many varying situations as they can manage. It's not easy when you're a Wizard.

Sure, Wizards have power. But they also burn their precious xp away on a not inconsiderable number of things and a couple of bad decisions when you choose your spell load out can seriously ruin your day. All of which means that their short term power can be out performed in the long run by a melee character that's only moderately optimised.

In a theoretical arena match taking place in the traditional grey void with no limitations like a GM asking how the character knows what the thing he's trying to Polymorph into actually looks like, or no objectives (like rescuing the princess or getting away with the fabled Golden Idol), a Wizard is going to be a power house. But in a real situation, with a group of players around a table, the caster may as well be an arrow magnet.

Arcane casters need their meat shields, but the meat shields can do pretty good for themselves without the arcane caster around.

And why do people never assume the Fighter is going to have invested heavily in healing potions? A few quick slugs on some Ol' CSW puts the fighter right back to where he was at the start of the day. How does a caster do the same for his spell slots?

AstralFire
2009-10-27, 08:53 PM
Did you just seriously suggest using 3d8+5 HP potions to restore the health of a high level character?

Also: XP burn doesn't really hurt you because you get XP faster when you're a level behind, and the Wizard can still function. So you craft to get lots of spell-trigger items for when you need them to get around the spell slot weakness.

Additionally: Ring of Sustenance. Wizard now only has to sleep for 2 hours. Throw on rope trick and they're guaranteed that, most times.

aje8
2009-10-27, 08:58 PM
In a theoretical arena match taking place in the traditional grey void with no limitations like a GM asking how the character knows what the thing he's trying to Polymorph into actually looks like, or no objectives (like rescuing the princess or getting away with the fabled Golden Idol), a Wizard is going to be a power house. But in a real situation, with a group of players around a table, the caster may as well be an arrow magnet.

Arcane casters need their meat shields, but the meat shields can do pretty good for themselves without the arcane caster around.

And why do people never assume the Fighter is going to have invested heavily in healing potions? A few quick slugs on some Ol' CSW puts the fighter right back to where he was at the start of the day. How does a caster do the same for his spell slots
See, the problem with your theory is fundamentally evidence. There is a ton of evidence from arena battles, tons of anectodes and lots of theoretical reasons why the Wizard is better.

There is little evidence why a fighter is better. In fact, around the table there have been quite a few reports of Wizards breaking the game. I've yet to hear one of a straight fighter doing so.

Arcane Casters need meatsheilds?! No. They can summon one at the lower levels, at the higher levels just 1-spell the encounter, enervation it to death, gate in a solar, w/e.

Meastsheild need casters. Try playing high level ecnounters without them. You'll realize very quickly that the Fighter is losing. The Wizard isn't.

Oh and one last thing, Healing potions are conisdered a very BAD investment by the optimization community. Not that they actually matter...... the Wizard is just hitting the Fighter or BBEG with a Save or Die and making hp irrelevant......... yeah.

Mushroom Ninja
2009-10-27, 08:59 PM
Low hit points,
As a Wizard, it's fairly easy to avoid getting hit via flight, contingencies, Battelfield control, phantom steed, etc.


poor BAB,
Who needs BAB? The very few attack rolls you make as a wizard are touch attacks. Also, there's always True strike.


bad synergy on their saves and stats,
Not as big a problem as with pretty much any other non-cleric/druid class. Wizards have access to spells that increase their saves (Superior Resistance etc.) and spells that make various saves less important (Magic Circle vs. X, Protection From Energy, Mindblank, Spell Turning, etc.)


with a relatively low AC.
It is relatively easy to avoid attacks as a wizard.



Plus having to spend a third of the day in complete rest conditions, with another hour on top of that to prepare for as many varying situations as they can manage. It's not easy when you're a Wizard.
Rope trick does wonders.


But they also burn their precious xp away on a not inconsiderable number of things
Not as much as you might think. Aside from the occasional scroll, wizards don't need to craft much. Also, few spells with XP costs are absolutely necessary.



and a couple of bad decisions when you choose your spell load out can seriously ruin your day.

But, as a melee person, a few bad rolls can seriously ruin your day. Botch an opposed trip check and you may find yourself lying down for the rest of the battle (and your life).

Milskidasith
2009-10-27, 08:59 PM
Invested heavily in healing potions? A few quick slugs on some Ol' CSW puts the fighter right back to where he was at the start of the day. How does a caster do the same for his spell slots?

Healing potions are crap; wands of vigor are the best for your money, though a wand of CLW is cheaper than potions and can be used while running away. The thing is, giving the fighter an arbitrary 2x his HP in items is a bit unfair; he should have to spend his WBL on that.

As for spell slots: Pearls of Power. If you are arbitrarily giving the fighters "2x HP in items" then give casters an arbitrary "2x their spell slots in Pearls of Power."

aje8
2009-10-27, 09:03 PM
Healing potions are crap; wands of vigor are the best for your money, though a wand of CLW is cheaper than potions and can be used while running away. The thing is, giving the fighter an arbitrary 2x his HP in items is a bit unfair; he should have to spend his WBL on that.
As for spell slots: Pearls of Power. If you are arbitrarily giving the fighters "2x HP in items" then give casters an arbitrary "2x their spell slots in Pearls

While it's true that giving Fighters hp restores that do little for casters is unfair, I'm pretty sure a Caster can win anyway, espially if the combat is high level. Though the level obviously has a large effect on this contest.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-27, 09:03 PM
5-7 encounters a day isn't really normal, the game was built around 4 equal level encounters a day, and I doubt many players will face 7 in a single day.

In any case, who cares about solo ability? People don't normally play D&D alone, and when the do then inter-class balance doesn't matter.

If you want to be realistic it should be a party test.

I would participate in such a test using book rules. Four random level appropriate encounters in a day.

We'd need a method for determining success though, in the likely event that both were successful. Total # of rounds spent in the dungeon?

And yes, if PrCs are allowed for one class, they should be allowed for the other.

Stompy
2009-10-27, 09:07 PM
Uh, I believe everyone gets the 2 x HP in healing potions, which is skewed towards the fighter with his more HP (usually). There should be a set number of potions (= set number of potential healing) both sides get.

...was this a thought experiment thread or an actual experiment with participants?

Godskook
2009-10-27, 09:08 PM
And why do people never assume the Fighter is going to have invested heavily in healing potions? A few quick slugs on some Ol' CSW puts the fighter right back to where he was at the start of the day. How does a caster do the same for his spell slots?

Pearls of power?

And I'm rather aghast that you'd suggest CSW when healing belts exist, and since they're the same price, the healing belt will last way longer. I never make a character without one these days.

Mushroom Ninja
2009-10-27, 09:08 PM
There should be a set number of potions (= set number of potential healing) both sides get.

This, or each side should have to buy its curative items with its WBL.

Milskidasith
2009-10-27, 09:09 PM
This, or each side should have to buy its curative items with its WBL.

I agree with this. There is no reason a wizard would ever buy HP items, and if they did, it would be a wand of CSW or something that lasts longer than potions.

AshDesert
2009-10-27, 09:10 PM
It's things like this that make the wizard more effective than the fighter. Because one is constrained by reality, whereas reality is constrained by the first.

This may be the best explanation for the fighter v. wizard (and indeed the non-spellcasters v. spellcasters) argument I've seen yet.

AstralFire
2009-10-27, 09:10 PM
If only having twice your HP in Cure Serious Wounds potions* did much for Forcecage.

Seriously, back when I was so new to D&D I thought I was being HAX AWESOME by setting myself on fire with Body of the Sun and then wildshaping into a little falcon and flying around someone in a tight circle lots to do TONS OF DAMAGE I could tell that potions sucked in this game.

Kesnit
2009-10-27, 09:12 PM
Conveniently long enough to eliminate any long term buffs from the wizard,

Realistic. As you pointed out, the game is designed for 4 encounters / day. It isn't unrealistic to assume the 4 are spaced throughout the day, rather than stacked enough to maintain buffs.


though with Phantom Steed that becomes a sixteenth of that with a hustling phantom steed (or if you assume the characters are hustling, a 'mere' one eight of that.)

Would you prefer the encounters be 4 hours apart?


WOAH WOAH WOAH. So the fighter gets to entirely restore his primary resource, HP, twice, while the wizard gets nothing?

Aren't Wizards supposed to be able to own everything, all the time? Why should they need to refill, if they are that good?


That's not testing if a fighter can beat a wizard, that's testing if three identical fighters can, playing tag team, beat a single wizard.

Nope, again, it is a realistic test, based on the mechanics of the game. There are ways to refill HP, but no ways to refill slots.


If it's a level 17+ crawl... Genesis makes time irrelevant.

The OP did not say what level this was occurring at. Everyone is assuming the WIZ is high enough to cast 9th level spells, but that is not assured.


It's more encounters than a wizard is designed for,

It's more than any class is designed for.


in environments that favor the fighter

So you are admitting that Wizards aren't the end-all, be-all? Besides, dungeons are (here is that word again) realistic. Dungeon crawling is a large part of D&D.

Stompy
2009-10-27, 09:12 PM
And I'm rather aghast that you'd suggest CSW when healing belts exist, and since they're the same price, the healing belt will last way longer. I never make a character without one these days.

Healing belts are good, but we are (trying) to keep this experiment core only.

New question, is it beating the encounter if I bypass any of the encounters? (invisibility + silent dimension door come to mind, but there may be better options.)

taltamir
2009-10-27, 09:12 PM
5-7 encounters a day isn't really normal, the game was built around 4 equal level encounters a day, and I doubt many players will face 7 in a single day.

In any case, who cares about solo ability? People don't normally play D&D alone, and when the do then inter-class balance doesn't matter.

If you want to be realistic it should be a party test.

+1
I can't over stress that this is no a solo game. Yes, some classes are more suited for solo then others, so what? The question should be "is everyone having fun" and "is everyone contributing"... if a class is primarily buffing and never gets to kill anything, then designers are probably gonna increase its might, a LOT, so that they don't feel like a heal battery or a buff monkey for the "hero", but rather be heroes themselves. Does that mean that some people can wrangle that class to overshadow other classes? yes, yes it does.

Current game i am a wizard varient.. I have never, ever, killed something and probably will not for a long time (well, I once set a building on fire with an enemy in it, but that is an RP kill). I do not have a single spell that CAN kill something. But I have turned the tide of battle, because all my spells are buffs and debuffs... Grease, glitterdust, haste, slow, and more. You can have fun and play a VALUABLE MEMBER OF A TEAM. And the party tank is VERY valuable to any team.

Milskidasith
2009-10-27, 09:12 PM
This may be the best explanation for the fighter v. wizard (and indeed the non-spellcasters v. spellcasters) argument I've seen yet.

Hey! Psionics can put up a respectable fight, and they are manifesters, not spellcasters! We demand equal rights!

Granted, they aren't tier 1, but they are still a very respectable sorcerer alternative.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-27, 09:15 PM
We've got an all wizard party going over in the roleplaying part of this site...it's a hoot, and we're tearing through mobs pretty rapidly. I think I've killed an appropriately ECLed mob in each combat round in the last...four or five? And Im specialized in evocation.

I'd be interested in seeing an all fighter party...

Mushroom Ninja
2009-10-27, 09:16 PM
Honestly, I doubt the 2xHP heals would shift the challenge in the fighter's favor significantly, but, for the purpose of gathering empirical data, it would make much more sense to use standard WBL rules for Healing-Acquisition.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-27, 09:18 PM
Aren't Fighters supposed to be able to own everything, all the time? Why should they need to refill, if they are that good?

Fixed it for you.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-27, 09:22 PM
Realistic. As you pointed out, the game is designed for 4 encounters / day. It isn't unrealistic to assume the 4 are spaced throughout the day, rather than stacked enough to maintain buffs.



Would you prefer the encounters be 4 hours apart?

I would prefer a random spacing of encounters. Anywhere from back to back to hours apart. Either can happen in a normal game, so using either a mix, or random chance to determine encounter spacing is more appropriate that setting a fixed time.

Alternatively, you could simply space the encounters out in the dungeon, leaving the time between them dependent on travel speed.


Aren't Wizards supposed to be able to own everything, all the time? Why should they need to refill, if they are that good?

You're missing the point of an equal test. And if the test isn't equal, it isn't proving a thing.


Nope, again, it is a realistic test, based on the mechanics of the game. There are ways to refill HP, but no ways to refill slots.

Sure there are. Pearls of power, spell storing rings, ring of sustenance, etc. And that's just core.


The OP did not say what level this was occurring at. Everyone is assuming the WIZ is high enough to cast 9th level spells, but that is not assured.

Well, I would posit that balance would best be determined by having a series of matches at various levels. Perhaps 1, 5, 10, 15, 20.


So you are admitting that Wizards aren't the end-all, be-all? Besides, dungeons are (here is that word again) realistic. Dungeon crawling is a large part of D&D.

It is, but it's certainly not the only part, and a good portion of material is designed for non-dungeon areas. Either a variety of battlefields should be selected, or the battlefields should be randomly chosen.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-27, 09:24 PM
Sure there are. Pearls of power, spell storing rings, ring of sustenance, etc. And that's just core.

Those don't seem to do anything for restoring spell slots.

Milskidasith
2009-10-27, 09:26 PM
Realistic. As you pointed out, the game is designed for 4 encounters / day. It isn't unrealistic to assume the 4 are spaced throughout the day, rather than stacked enough to maintain buffs.


When it's time based and you have to spend a total of 25 minutes (five encounters, five minutes), to 105 minutes (seven encounters, 15 minutes) it doesn't make all that much sense. If the enemies are fortifying if you recuperate, why can't they fortify in the long travel time?



Would you prefer the encounters be 4 hours apart?

Yes; two hour nap, one hour prep, and an hour and six seconds to wait to cast teleport so the fighter can feel like he ran faster than the wizard.




Aren't Wizards supposed to be able to own everything, all the time? Why should they need to refill, if they are that good?

Because the point of this test is to prove the fighter is as good as the wizard. If he needs 3x his daily value of HP to prove it, that isn't proving the fighter is better (not that HP matters for wizard spells, but this is a dungeon crawl, not a deathmatch.)


Nope, again, it is a realistic test, based on the mechanics of the game. There are ways to refill HP, but no ways to refill slots.


Pearls of Power. They are core. Yes, they refill slots. Any slot, yes.


The OP did not say what level this was occurring at. Everyone is assuming the WIZ is high enough to cast 9th level spells, but that is not assured.

I said if they were 17th level. But hey, at most any level the wizard can win. At level 1, it's "save or die" versus "have a high enough AC or die" though, again, the fighter gets an advantage in having 3x the HP he would normally have.


It's more than any class is designed for.

But three daily values of fighter is 12 encounters, so he has almost twice as much HP (in total) as he should, for free, on top of his WBL, while the wizard gets useless HP items as opposed to 12 encounters worth of spells. The 12 encounters here is theoretical, not in practice; I can end far more than 12 encounters at level 20.




So you are admitting that Wizards aren't the end-all, be-all? Besides, dungeons are (here is that word again) realistic. Dungeon crawling is a large part of D&D.

Dungeons are completely unrealistic for a variety of reasons, number one that they aren't economical even by D&D standards, and give no advantage to the person controlling them considering it allows a group of PCs to move with relative freedom while your forces are stuck in small batches. As for admitting wizard's aren't the be all, end all: I'm not. I'm just saying favoring the fighter in every way possible isn't going to prove that the fighter can match the wizard; it's proving a fighter with a lot of conditions in his favor can beat the wizard (and even that's iffy).

Take an extreme example: What if it was Wizard 20 at -9 HP, no spell slots left, grappled in an AMF versus a fighter who has UMD as a class skill and as many scrolls of Quickened Intensified Expanded Epic Heightened Widened Persistent Wish as he wanted. Granted, that's extreme, but that test wouldn't prove anything. This is similar, but on a lesser scale; the fighter gets 3x his normal HP and fights in places where he can't be penalized for his lack of ranged options (while he can full attack with a bow, if not specialized for it, he won't be able to do as much as in melee.)

Tyndmyr
2009-10-27, 09:27 PM
Sleep for 2 hours to get spells instead of eight. Yes, you can't use it endlessly, but it does help you get your spells back more rapidly than you otherwise would.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-27, 09:28 PM
Sleep for 2 hours to get spells instead of eight. Yes, you can't use it endlessly, but it does help you get your spells back more rapidly than you otherwise would.

You still have to rest for 8 hours total to regain spells.

Flayerman
2009-10-27, 09:29 PM
Dungeons are completely unrealistic for a variety of reasons, number one that they aren't economical even by D&D standards

Dungeons aren't economical in Dungeons and Dragons?

That's hilarious!

Tyndmyr
2009-10-27, 09:29 PM
Specific overrides general.



The ring also refreshes the body and mind, so that its wearer needs only sleep 2 hours per day to gain the benefit of 8 hours of sleep.


Refreshing spells is a benefit of 8 hours of sleep.

Milskidasith
2009-10-27, 09:29 PM
You still have to rest for 8 hours total to regain spells.

It's vaguely worded; you get the benefits of 8 hours of sleep in two. One of the benefits, for wizards, of eight hours of sleep is the ability to re-prep their spells. It's more of a DM call than anything.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-27, 09:30 PM
Dungeons aren't economical in Dungeons and Dragons?

That's hilarious!

What's hilarious is the Stronghold Builder's Manuel.

Milskidasith
2009-10-27, 09:30 PM
Dungeons aren't economical in Dungeons and Dragons?

That's hilarious!

Yes, it's hilarious, but completely true; all dungeons do is cost a crapton (by the SHBG) and allow earthquake to drop the ceiling on you.

Mushroom Ninja
2009-10-27, 09:32 PM
I'm not so sure that the dungeon environment is actually the fighter's forte. Although the fighter doesn't have to worry as much about flying enemies, there are many non-combat obstacles which he/she is ill-equip to deal with. Traps, locked things, and decaying rope bridges over impossibly deep chasms are just a few of the challanges that a fighter would have trouble with.

Milskidasith
2009-10-27, 09:35 PM
This appears to be a purely combat test, since it only mentioned encounters and not traps. If there were traps, it would just be another feather in the wizard's cap.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-27, 09:36 PM
Yeah, traps end up being "lets watch the fighter roll saves". We already know which class is better at avoiding traps, may as well skip all that.

Flayerman
2009-10-27, 09:38 PM
What's hilarious is the Stronghold Builder's Manuel.

Hah hah! Truth.

taltamir
2009-10-27, 09:45 PM
You still have to rest for 8 hours total to regain spells.

with a ring of sustenance, that is why you use the magic bedroll that requires 1 hour of sleep only and DOES explicitly allow you to get spells back as if you rested 8.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-27, 09:46 PM
In fairness, stone walls are free underground, so simple space is...pretty cheap if you're not fussed about it being fancy.

Now, the elaborate multilevel dungeons we all know from so many scenarios...yeah, they'd cost a frigging fortune. Screw the loot, sell the dungeon.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-27, 09:48 PM
with a ring of sustenance, that is why you use the magic bedroll that requires 1 hour of sleep only and DOES explicitly allow you to get spells back as if you rested 8.

He already ignored the other two core suggestions to focus on the one vaguely questionable one.

Pearls of power is pretty hard to argue with, since restoring already cast spells is explicitly what they do, and it's a whopping standard action each. So...expect that to continue to be ignored.

The only really fair thing to do is allow each class to spend WBL as they choose.

taltamir
2009-10-27, 09:51 PM
poisons are unrealistically expensive... traps i don't know about (as in, I have no idea what they cost)...
a dungeon? just a few weeks of work with the right spells (shape stone, stone to mud > purify water, disintegrate, stone wall, etc)

AstralFire
2009-10-27, 09:51 PM
I'm going to take a wild guess and just say that Pharaoh's Fist is just pointing out potential questionable elements so as to leave the opposition fewer holes to poke in a mostly airtight argument.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-27, 09:54 PM
poisons are unrealistically expensive... traps i don't know about (as in, I have no idea what they cost)...
a dungeon? just a few weeks of work with the right spells (shape stone, stone to mud > purify water, disintegrate, stone wall, etc)

Yeah. In practice, If I wanted to actually build a dungeon, Id hire laborers at the rates given. Materials are essentially free for any caster with enough resources to care about having a dungeon. You can cast magic traps yourself.

Honestly, I'd cover the walls in explosive runes, Sepia Snake Sigils, etc. Nobody but me is walking in there with their eyes open and living.

Milskidasith
2009-10-27, 09:55 PM
That makes sense; it's an iffy issue, and 15 minutes isn't enough to use a Ring of Sustenance anyway (though it is enough to fortify the next area, so I suspect, for versimmilitude, the mission is of the "midnight sacrifice" variety.)

So no Ring of Sustenance making a wizard's workday longer (or shorter, depending on your POV).

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-27, 09:59 PM
He already ignored the other two core suggestions to focus on the one vaguely questionable one.


Perhaps because that's the one that happens to be wrong?

Milskidasith
2009-10-27, 10:08 PM
Perhaps because that's the one that happens to be wrong?

Questionable, depending on whether "you can reprepare spells after 8 hours of rest" is included in the benefits of resting 8 hours Ring of Sustenance mentions. It's vaguely worded.

taltamir
2009-10-27, 10:17 PM
Questionable, depending on whether "you can reprepare spells after 8 hours of rest" is included in the benefits of resting 8 hours Ring of Sustenance mentions. It's vaguely worded.

but it is explicitly said to work for the bedroll.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-27, 11:30 PM
Questionable, depending on whether "you can reprepare spells after 8 hours of rest" is included in the benefits of resting 8 hours Ring of Sustenance mentions. It's vaguely worded.

The actual text of the description says:

Sustenance
This ring continually provides its wearer with life-sustaining nourishment. The ring also refreshes the body and mind, so that its wearer needs only sleep 2 hours per day to gain the benefit of 8 hours of sleep. The ring must be worn for a full week before it begins to work. If it is removed, the owner must wear it for another week to reattune it to himself.

It's a bit of a leap to draw your conclusions.

AstralFire
2009-10-27, 11:32 PM
Er... PF, mind spelling that thought process out for me? Honestly, the part about 'mind' that you underlined really reinforces the possibility for me.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-27, 11:35 PM
Er... PF, mind spelling that thought process out for me?
t-h-a-t t-h-o-u-g-h-t p-r-o-c-e-s-s

AstralFire
2009-10-27, 11:37 PM
That's fair enough. I never got a PHB (hooray for SRDs!) but comparing it to the text for Elves and sleeping might be handy.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-27, 11:44 PM
That's fair enough. I never got a PHB (hooray for SRDs!) but comparing it to the text for Elves and sleeping might be handy.

It seems to me that it mentally refreshes you, like you had a good night's sleep, but spellcasting depends on resting and not doing strenuous activity for 8 hours, not just being well rested.

For example, elves are refreshed after 4 hours of trance, but still need 8 hours of rest to regain spells.

ps. Editing is fun.

AstralFire
2009-10-27, 11:48 PM
That's what I thought; couldn't remember the exact wording, though. I think you are correct, sir. -hands a cookie-

GoodbyeSoberDay
2009-10-28, 12:34 AM
The druid is overpowered out of the box by level 1. It's incredibly simple to break in core and still improves dramatically with splatbooks. The druid's abilities are much easier to compare to the fighter's. Yet every caster v melee thread is, invariably, wizard versus fighter. I have two theories why this is the case:

1. Wizard v fighter threads are a self-perpetuating phenomenon. People make wizard v fighter threads because they saw the previous round of wizard v fighter threads and were left unsatisfied (speaking of which, the thread title should be changed from Mk II to Mk >9000).

2. Druids don't get compared to fighters in long, drawn-out threads precisely because it's a more apt comparison of abilities. There's much less confusion (and less room for delusion, to make a terrible rhyme) when you are comparing the melee abilities of some silly chain-wielding schmuck and the giant bear who casts spells. Consider the OP's challenge. Druids are so well-suited to solo a dungeon it hurts.

So, what do you all think? Maybe I underestimate the amount of wizard bragging that happens on a daily basis. I do love me some arcane spellcasting.

Sliver
2009-10-28, 01:16 AM
If the dungeon is set in a no-magic plane, the fighter will best the wizard. Its right there, staring at you. Fighters are better. No class features FTW.

KellKheraptis
2009-10-28, 02:53 AM
Not sure if it's been mentioned or not, but short of a "bag and gag, dumped in the dungeon" scenario (which a properly prepped wizard will NEVER fall into, particularly at higher levels), there is no reason to assume a wizard will not have prior/advanced knowledge of what he will be facing in the dungeon. When gods answer your questions, you tend to have a handle on what the future will hold, and there's a small army worth of them to ask. Cross reference to insure accuracy, rest up, prep, and laugh as every single encounter is deja vu. Oh, and usually especially at higher levels, one or three spells is all that is needed to best encounters, and after that it's clean-up. No long term buffs left? I beg to differ. Take a look at all the 24 hour ones. And even Core only, I can get a CL of 40. 15-30 mins between encounters? So I have to recast two times, tops. And my enveloping pit/rope trick/portable hole/mord's mansion ensure I can do it unmolested. Basic knowledge of geometry also goes a long way towards not getting disturbed, as all of these, being extra dimensional, do not have to conform to the plane or origin's relativistic properties (gravity, magnetic north, etc.). And in the specific case of the fighter, even a lowly Ghaele Eladrin will give a core 20 fighter a tough time, and wizards can access that from level 10 on (10 HD). What again was available on the cleric list from 0th-6th level spells? Now at level 20, the wizard doesn't ever have to even come down to the material plane if he doesn't feel like it. He has full access to 2 out of 3 main spell lists, and virtual access to the third of up to 8th level (I believe it's 8th, possibly only 7th, depending on if it's "spell" or "divine spell"). And that's not even mentioning the ultimate in dungeon mobility, earth glide, which the fighter has zilch chance of using.

Now if we're talking head to head, instead of a "time trial" so to speak, the fighter is even more screwed. First, he's gotta have a way to fly. Second, he's gotta actually get close enough to smack the wizard, since the moment a bow is drawn, Gust of Wind or the like will render it impotent. Third, his means of flight, should he reveal it, will be the first thing targetted, and fourth, once it's gone, game over. One spell later he'll be falling from orbit, assuming the wizard didn't have the forsight to prep a double sided pit trap for falling into poisoned spikes over and over as the wizard inserts our hapless falling fighter into the rubix cube of death and reverses gravity inside it every round. make it inside a giant forcecage, and our fighter is fubared.

My contribution, for what it's worth (or just adding fuel to another "Fighter Vs Wizard" thread, either way...).

GoodbyeSoberDay
2009-10-28, 03:28 AM
If the dungeon is set in a no-magic plane, the fighter will best the wizard. Its right there, staring at you. Fighters are better. No class features FTW.That would be an odd plane. You could probably Plane Shift into it, but there would be no way to get back out. It would be as though someone took all the horror and mystery out of Ravenloft but left the dreariness.

Kaiyanwang
2009-10-28, 03:30 AM
Wow... so people continue to assume that the game is built around 4 encounters/day.

Every time, is fun like the first time.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-28, 07:37 AM
but it is explicitly said to work for the bedroll.

The bedroll is much more specific, probably to eliminate abuse. The fact that it works once per day, but can only grant a single person the benefit once per 48 hrs is pretty clearly an attempt to limit the ability to use slotless items en mass to cycle ridiculous amounts of spells.

The ring happens to have more effects and less limitations(probably because it's slotted). Thus, each effect is detailed less.

It's significant that the bedroll states that it's actual effect is granting the effects of "eight hours of sleep". The effect of restoring spells is merely a part of the listing of the effects of "eight hours of sleep".

Clearly, this shows that the ring provides the exact same thing.

Thrice Dead Cat
2009-10-28, 09:59 AM
If the dungeon is set in a no-magic plane, the fighter will best the wizard. Its right there, staring at you. Fighters are better. No class features FTW.

Well, in a core only match, yes, probably. but, if Mr. Wizard has access to 9th level spells, Invoke Magic (Lords of Madness) suddenly brings him back to near full power. Especially if Invoke Magic is used for a planar bubble.

Kurald Galain
2009-10-28, 10:05 AM
It strikes me as obvious that a comparison such as this shouldn't be done on level 20. Most gaming sessions don't play at level 20, most campaigns never reach level 20, and level 20 has a number of extreme powers or combos that simply don't come up at lower levels (among others, level-9 spells and its ludicrous WBL).

How about we keep it realistic and talk about level 10 or so?

Thrice Dead Cat
2009-10-28, 10:09 AM
It strikes me as obvious that a comparison such as this shouldn't be done on level 20. Most gaming sessions don't play at level 20, most campaigns never reach level 20, and level 20 has a number of extreme powers or combos that simply don't come up at lower levels (among others, level-9 spells and its ludicrous WBL).

How about we keep it realistic and talk about level 10 or so?

Alternatively, we could do the absolutely insane option of not just every level, put every single experience point possible, multiple times.

Yukitsu
2009-10-28, 10:24 AM
That would be an odd plane. You could probably Plane Shift into it, but there would be no way to get back out. It would be as though someone took all the horror and mystery out of Ravenloft but left the dreariness.

The only one in standard planescape settings is the exact center of the outlands. You can walk out of it.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-28, 10:27 AM
Being stuck in a non-magical area with a buncha old guys who have suddenly lost all ability to do anything but tell you of the cool stuff they used to do. It'd be like a retirement home in florida...

Yeah, lets assume standard material plane(with coeterminous etherial/shadow planes). Im perfectly ok with level 10 as well.

Kylarra
2009-10-28, 10:31 AM
Alternatively, we could do the absolutely insane option of not just every level, put every single experience point possible, multiple times.Complete with lowered exp totals for crafting the items that you want... oh wait. :smallwink: Guess the fighter's stuck on random loot tables for eq.

kamikasei
2009-10-28, 10:33 AM
And I think it should be pretty obvious that in such a situation a wizard does not dominate the way it would in a straight-up duel.

As far as I've been able to tell, the "a well-played wizard can hand any fighter his rear end on a plate conjured from nothing in a straight-up duel" contention comes specifically as a reaction to claims that "yeah maybe your wizard can teleport all around the place and kill monsters with a word, but my fighter could take him down any day!"

Much like monk and warlock hate are driven less by the failures of the classes than by the tendency for some players/DMs to overestimate them ("my monk is totally awesome and can kill anything!" "ZOMG warlocks are so OP, BANNED 4EVA"), the reason people emphasize duels rather than relative adventuring ability for wizard v fighter comparisons is precisely that the fighter advocates set the terms that way.

In other words, I think your criticism itself misses the mark.

Sliver
2009-10-28, 11:55 AM
Well, in a core only match, yes, probably. but, if Mr. Wizard has access to 9th level spells, Invoke Magic (Lords of Madness) suddenly brings him back to near full power. Especially if Invoke Magic is used for a planar bubble.

If the wizard is dropped into this plane without knowing he should prepare for it, just after him preparing his spells (we want to make it fair, don't we?) on a day that he didn't prepare Invoke Magic (and didn't keep any 9th level spell slots empty), with a 8 hour time limit so he can not rest and refresh (he could rest, but he won't have the time to prepare!). Fighter wins. Unless he wants to use his magical gear.. Darn.. Well he will still win in a no magic brawl against the puny wizard with his d4 HP and weak BAB.. Now the old wizard wish he didn't spend his life telling reality to sit down and wait its turn, but needed to work out a bit more.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-28, 12:02 PM
If the wizard is dropped into this plane without knowing he should prepare for it, just after him preparing his spells (we want to make it fair, don't we?)

What part of being dropped without warning onto a magic-less plane with a fighter waiting to gut him is "fair"?

Milskidasith
2009-10-28, 12:05 PM
If the wizard is dropped into this plane without knowing he should prepare for it, just after him preparing his spells (we want to make it fair, don't we?) on a day that he didn't prepare Invoke Magic (and didn't keep any 9th level spell slots empty), with a 8 hour time limit so he can not rest and refresh (he could rest, but he won't have the time to prepare!). Fighter wins. Unless he wants to use his magical gear.. Darn.. Well he will still win in a no magic brawl against the puny wizard with his d4 HP and weak BAB.. Now the old wizard wish he didn't spend his life telling reality to sit down and wait its turn, but needed to work out a bit more.

What wizard wouldn't have a contingent Invoke Magic up? I mean, it's an absurdly useful spell and allows you to get the hell out of anywhere if, for some reason, your other contingencies didn't keep you from being in a no magic area.

Killer Angel
2009-10-28, 12:22 PM
What part of being dropped without warning onto a magic-less plane with a fighter waiting to gut him is "fair"?

Don't know... my impression is that sliver was being sarcastic.
I hope. :smallwink:

chiasaur11
2009-10-28, 12:50 PM
If the wizard is dropped into this plane without knowing he should prepare for it, just after him preparing his spells (we want to make it fair, don't we?) on a day that he didn't prepare Invoke Magic (and didn't keep any 9th level spell slots empty), with a 8 hour time limit so he can not rest and refresh (he could rest, but he won't have the time to prepare!). Fighter wins. Unless he wants to use his magical gear.. Darn.. Well he will still win in a no magic brawl against the puny wizard with his d4 HP and weak BAB.. Now the old wizard wish he didn't spend his life telling reality to sit down and wait its turn, but needed to work out a bit more.

Unless the Wizard is Mustrum Ridcully.

Zeful
2009-10-28, 01:05 PM
Yes; two hour nap, one hour prep, and an hour and six seconds to wait to cast teleport so the fighter can feel like he ran faster than the wizard.

Doesn't work that way. In core a Wizard has to rest 8 hours (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#rest) to regain his spells as the bedroll that specifies otherwise is not core.


Refreshing spells is a benefit of 8 hours of sleep.Wrong, it's the benefit of 8 hours of restful calm.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-28, 02:09 PM
To prepare her daily spells, a wizard must first sleep for 8 hours.


How does gaining the benefits of 8 hours of sleep not satisfy that condition?

Restful calm only applies if the character does not need to sleep. This is irrelevant for our purposes, since sleep is still happening.

Arakune
2009-10-28, 02:13 PM
Let's try this: Lich + ring of sustenance.

Myrmex
2009-10-28, 02:26 PM
In fairness, stone walls are free underground, so simple space is...pretty cheap if you're not fussed about it being fancy.

Now, the elaborate multilevel dungeons we all know from so many scenarios...yeah, they'd cost a frigging fortune. Screw the loot, sell the dungeon.

Isn't the price of a dungeon used for when the PCs want to buy one?
I thought Evil Overlords get dungeons as part of their Plot Feature, much like fighters get bonus feats or wizards get spellcasting.

Or do you make all your NPCs take leadership, dragon cohort, and the like?

Gametime
2009-10-28, 02:29 PM
How does gaining the benefits of 8 hours of sleep not satisfy that condition?

Restful calm only applies if the character does not need to sleep. This is irrelevant for our purposes, since sleep is still happening.

If sleeping isn't the necessary factor for regaining spells, then there isn't any clear basis to think that it is a sufficient factor.

Another thing to keep in mind is that even if the Ring of Sustenance does let you prepare new spells, the Rules Compendium clearly states that any spells cast within the last eight hours prevent you from preparing that many spells of those levels. Unless you've been doing nothing for six hours prior to sleeping with the Ring, you're going to still be woefully unprepared for the following day.

While it could be argued that ignoring this penalty is a "benefit" of eight hours of sleep, it's a pretty severe stretch.

ericgrau
2009-10-28, 02:38 PM
If you don't need to sleep you still need 8 hours of restful calm. You could interpret this multiple ways, especially a technical interpretation that benefits your character (though that's certainly not the only strict interpretation), but restful calm for the other 6 hours seems most appropriate. Especially when you see this line:


The wizard does not have to slumber for every minute of the time, but she must refrain from movement, combat, spellcasting, skill use, conversation, or any other fairly demanding physical or mental task during the rest period.

----


Perhaps you should run the test and draw conclusions based on actual, empirical evidence.

This. I was thinking of running a similar test once, but I warned others from the start that I might not have time. And I didn't. If anyone put forth the effort and posted lots of details, I at least would love to see it and would appreciate the effort.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-28, 03:08 PM
That's not justifiable by RAW, though, so it isn't really important for this particular discussion.

They are simply alternative means to get the benefits of eight hours of sleep for those that do not sleep, or are interrupted while doing so.

Doug Lampert
2009-10-28, 03:57 PM
The druid is overpowered out of the box by level 1. It's incredibly simple to break in core and still improves dramatically with splatbooks. The druid's abilities are much easier to compare to the fighter's. Yet every caster v melee thread is, invariably, wizard versus fighter. I have two theories why this is the case:

1. Wizard v fighter threads are a self-perpetuating phenomenon. People make wizard v fighter threads because they saw the previous round of wizard v fighter threads and were left unsatisfied (speaking of which, the thread title should be changed from Mk II to Mk >9000).

2. Druids don't get compared to fighters in long, drawn-out threads precisely because it's a more apt comparison of abilities. There's much less confusion (and less room for delusion, to make a terrible rhyme) when you are comparing the melee abilities of some silly chain-wielding schmuck and the giant bear who casts spells. Consider the OP's challenge. Druids are so well-suited to solo a dungeon it hurts.

So, what do you all think? Maybe I underestimate the amount of wizard bragging that happens on a daily basis. I do love me some arcane spellcasting.

I think it's number 2. A Druid vs. Fighter comparison is a complete walkover for the Druid at EVERY level, levels 1-5 the druid can almost just watch his animal companion beat the fighter at his own game. Level 6+ or so the Druid has both natural spell and wildshape, and the fighter is screwed beyond belief, by about level 13-15 or so both wildshape and animal companions are completely overshadowed by spellcasting as a druid power, and yet these powers can STILL beat the fighter. There's simply no reasonable room for doubt, I have special abilities that are more powerful than your entire class (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0346.html) is far more true for a Druid vs. Fighter than for a Druid vs. Rogue, a Rogue CAN do things a Druid will find difficult.

The fighter fans simply avoid this comparison, and IME these threads are ALWAYS started by fighter fans, the wizard fans don't see any need to post threads pointing out the obvious.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-28, 04:09 PM
This. I was thinking of running a similar test once, but I warned others from the start that I might not have time. And I didn't. If anyone put forth the effort and posted lots of details, I at least would love to see it and would appreciate the effort.

Just for the record, I would like to note that the Tests of Spite are heavily dominated by casters.

Glimbur
2009-10-28, 04:17 PM
Just for the record, I would like to note that the Tests of Spite are heavily dominated by casters.

It could simply be a selection bias. Specifically, people that build characters for PvP in a rather optimized setting might have learned their optimization from the same sources that say casters >> non-casters. We'd need more details, like the number of casters v non-casters.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-28, 04:23 PM
It could simply be a selection bias. Specifically, people that build characters for PvP in a rather optimized setting might have learned their optimization from the same sources that say casters >> non-casters. We'd need more details, like the number of casters v non-casters.

There have been several melee characters. Did not do well on the whole vs casters.

Lycar
2009-10-28, 04:32 PM
Wow... so people continue to assume that the game is built around 4 encounters/day.

Every time, is fun like the first time.

Nice to see that you can laugh about it.

Me, it just makes me sad.

I believe this mythconception has caused more damage to the game then any splatbook ever did.

Lycar

Korgg
2009-10-28, 04:57 PM
ring of s.../bedroll doesnt matter much when you can prepare spells only once a day ( a set of spells once a day, same set you can leave slots for later)

for example:
a wizard rests for 8 hours during the night then at 6 am prepares his spells and uses them all around 2pm then goes to sleep(8 hours or ring or bedroll)
and at (10 pm or 16 pm or 15 pm) he cant prepare his spells untill 6 am the next day.

PHB 178 under rest

"To prepare her daily spells...."

or if im wrong please cite the page or link SRD pls

Zeful
2009-10-28, 05:06 PM
How does gaining the benefits of 8 hours of sleep not satisfy that condition?

Restful calm only applies if the character does not need to sleep. This is irrelevant for our purposes, since sleep is still happening.

Because it goes on to say that you don't need to sleep to regain spells, thus sleep is not a requirement. As long as you don't do x for 8 hours you may refresh spells after that period. The ring of Sustenance provides the benefits of 8 hours of sleep in a two hour period, magic restoration is not a benefit of 8 hours of sleep, and is only related tangentially as for those eight hours you are fulfilling the prerequisites of refraining from "movement, combat, spellcasting, skill use, conversation, or any other fairly demanding physical or mental task during the rest period."

Eldariel
2009-10-29, 01:40 AM
Nice to see that you can laugh about it.

Me, it just makes me sad.

I believe this mythconception has caused more damage to the game then any splatbook ever did.

Lycar

Last I checked, the game was balanced for ~4 CR-appropriate encounters/day.

Doc Roc
2009-10-29, 01:59 AM
Okay, I'll run it. Lay out the precise list of rules you want, and I will act as GM. However, we will run it on myth-weavers.

Lycar
2009-10-29, 04:34 AM
Last I checked, the game was balanced for ~4 CR-appropriate encounters/day.

And when was the last time you checked? Years ago? Did you ever check at all or are you just parroting what keeps being tossed around again and again ad nauseam?

If you really want to check, you look it up in the DMG, pages 49 & 50.

See that tiny little table down in the lower right corner of page 49? It is easy to overlook but that is the RAW about what kind of encounters the party is supposed to have.

Certainly not 4 CR-appropriate encounters/day and nothing else.

Instead the DMG itself suggests a mix of difficulty levels, ranging from trivial to unbeatable. And on page 50 we find the explanation what the terms 'easy', 'easy if handled properly', 'challenging', 'very difficult' and 'overpowering' actually mean (kinda like 'always evil' doesn't really mean always).

And they go on and tell us that 'easy' encounters are of the kind that the heroes ought to be able to handle 'virtually a limitless number of'.(Note that a caster type who has to expend so much as a single spell to beat one of those can not possibly do that. A fighter who keeps getting lucky and takes no damage can though.)

An 'easy if handled properly' encounter has a 'win button' of sorts. Undead with cleric support are a lot easier to deal with for example. Minimal resource expenditure should assure victory. If the win button isn't available, this might become a little harder.

A 'very difficult' encounter is one where a PC fatality might happen. Or in other words, this might as well drain near to 100% of party resources (or at least has save-or-die effects that make a PC die on a failed save!).

'Overpowering' is supposed to be just that: Run or die.

Ah, but what about 'challenging'? The entry says that those encounters are supposed to eat into the party's resources in such a way that the average party can handle about 4 of those.

But what does that really mean? Let us flip back a page and look at the paragraph 'What's Challenging?'. And here we find that, on average, such an encounter should drain about 20% of party resources.

And that means, if your party already had 4 'challenging' encounters, they should probably make camp. Because the 5th encounter might a well drain them to 100%, i.e. inflict a TPK.

But this is not 'the game is balanced around 4 encounters a day', this is just an example of how to read the Encounter Difficulty table. A party could as well have about 2 challenging encounters and, say, half a dozen or so easy ones and still be good.

4 encounters a day is a rule of thumb about what a party ought to be able to handle, nothing more. It no divine mandate that the party should never have more or less encounters then that. A single 'very difficult' encounter should be enough to force the party to retreat, likewise an experienced party could breeze through the upper levels of a dungeon without taking much damage.

Just because orks and goblins and kobolds stop being a threat to you doesn't mean they suddenly go extinct after all...

Lycar

Eldariel
2009-10-29, 04:46 AM
And when was the last time you checked? Years ago? Did you ever check at all or are you just parroting what keeps being tossed around again and again ad nauseam?

Alright, fine, on average the equivalent of 4 CR appropriate encounters/day. Was it really worth typing all that over three missing words?

mostlyharmful
2009-10-29, 04:48 AM
If the wizard is dropped into this plane without knowing he should prepare for it, just after him preparing his spells (we want to make it fair, don't we?) on a day that he didn't prepare Invoke Magic (and didn't keep any 9th level spell slots empty), with a 8 hour time limit so he can not rest and refresh (he could rest, but he won't have the time to prepare!). Fighter wins. Unless he wants to use his magical gear.. Darn.. Well he will still win in a no magic brawl against the puny wizard with his d4 HP and weak BAB.. Now the old wizard wish he didn't spend his life telling reality to sit down and wait its turn, but needed to work out a bit more.

Yeah, he's screwed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/clone.htm).... If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine!!!

Kaiyanwang
2009-10-29, 05:07 AM
Alright, fine, on average the equivalent of 4 CR appropriate encounters/day. Was it really worth typing all that over three missing words?

In my opinion is not the same thing. Saying that "more or less 4 encounters of equal CR cosnume all the party resources" is not the same to say that the games assume that every adventuring day works that way.

You could have a short, combat wise, adventure with only "boss" or another one with a lot of crappy monsters in large amount.

A day with 13 encounters or 13 days with 1 encounter. is different. Peple continue to say "D&D is based on 4 en****ers day" and "you face creatures of our CR".

So that should be written on walls, I guess. And is definitively worth typing, see.

Sliver
2009-10-29, 05:20 AM
Yeah, he's screwed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/clone.htm).... If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine!!!

There must be a way! A magical trap of "Trap the Soul" or something like that won't work on such a plane right? If only Envoke Magic did something like create something like a zone where magic is allowed for a round, but noooo, just the wizard gets to cast his spell.. Why does there have to be a spell to answer everything..


"D&D is absed on 4 en****ers day" and "you face creatures of our CR".

W.. Why is it censored?

Eldariel
2009-10-29, 05:23 AM
In my opinion is not the same thing. Saying that "more or less 4 encounters of equal CR cosnume all the party resources" is not the same to say that the games assume that every adventuring day works that way.

You could have a short, combat wise, adventure with only "boss" or another one with a lot of crappy monsters in large amount.

A day with 13 encounters or 13 days with 1 encounter. is different. Peple continue to say "D&D is absed on 4 en****ers day" and "you face creatures of our CR".

So that should be written on walls, I guess. And is definitively worth typing, see.

What I'm trying to say is: "The game balance expects you to be able to deal with the equivalent of 4 CR appropriate encounters with your daily resources"; that is, your daily resources have been rationed thusly that they should last you 4 CR appropriate encounters.

Whether you run into those 4 encounters and whether you run into an encounter ~4 CRs higher than you and whether you manage to survive an encounter with bribery/escape/whatever does not impact the assumption of how long your daily limitations last you.

Kaiyanwang
2009-10-29, 05:25 AM
W.. Why is it censored?

Well, this time I spelled veery wrong but seems to me overreact.

*panics* WAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH!


What I'm trying to say is: "The game balance expects you to be able to deal with the equivalent of 4 CR appropriate encounters with your daily resources"; that is, your daily resources have been rationed thusly that they should last you 4 CR appropriate encounters.

Whether you run into those 4 encounters and whether you run into an encounter ~4 CRs higher than you and whether you manage to survive an encounter with bribery/escape/whatever does not impact the assumption of how long your daily limitations last you.

I know you know. but what you said is different from what people say a lot of times.

mostlyharmful
2009-10-29, 05:47 AM
Why does there have to be a spell to answer everything..

Errr.... because the game was made by WIZARDS on the coast and not quantum-physicists on the coast?:smallconfused: That and it's magic.

Elana
2009-10-29, 01:08 PM
Isn't the price of a dungeon used for when the PCs want to buy one?
I thought Evil Overlords get dungeons as part of their Plot Feature, much like fighters get bonus feats or wizards get spellcasting.

Or do you make all your NPCs take leadership, dragon cohort, and the like?

Only when I'm feeling evil.

After all if it's via leadership, it's a class feature of the big bad, and so beating the cohort is worth no XP.

Thorcrest
2009-10-29, 02:01 PM
All you people and your 4 encounters per day. Who Cares?
We have played games where we had no encounters in a day, and others where there were 30, you live with it and just try to get what you need done, and more importantly survive, I have a game where there are about 15 encounters, followed by a boss, as well as traps and such on the way, and I expect minimal casualties, all this in one dungeon where the players cannot rest, or leave, thats their fault though so...
Anyways, Wizard and Fighter Each have there strengths and weaknesses in this scenario, but I feel it is pointless to repeat what others have said.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 02:03 PM
Because it goes on to say that you don't need to sleep to regain spells, thus sleep is not a requirement. As long as you don't do x for 8 hours you may refresh spells after that period. The ring of Sustenance provides the benefits of 8 hours of sleep in a two hour period, magic restoration is not a benefit of 8 hours of sleep, and is only related tangentially as for those eight hours you are fulfilling the prerequisites of refraining from "movement, combat, spellcasting, skill use, conversation, or any other fairly demanding physical or mental task during the rest period."

It specifically requires 8hrs of sleep. It then makes an exception for non-sleeping activities provided you don't violate the above list. It goes on to give rules for those who do not sleep.

A definition of what constitutes the requisite of "sleep" does not negate the requirement of sleep, or impose non-sleep requirements.

UglyPanda
2009-10-29, 02:16 PM
The description of the ring of sustenance says the user gets all the benefits of 8 hours of sleep in 2 hours. How does this affect a bard, sorcerer, or wizard who wants to regain spells? Specifically, how does this interact with the casting limit rule in the PH?
In the case of a ring of sustenance, “all the benefits of 8 hours of sleep” means the character sleeps for 2 hours and regains 1 hit point per level (see the rules for natural healing on Chapter 8 of the PH). If the ring wearer is fatigued, 2 hours of sleep removes the fatigue.
A wizard must have 8 hours of rest before regaining spells. If the wizard doesn’t have to sleep for some reason, she still requires 8 hours of rest to regain any spells (see Preparing Wizard Spells on page 177 of the PH). A ring of sustenance doesn’t change that.
A bard or sorcerer regains spells only once a day, and a ring of sustenance doesn’t increase that. A ring of sustenance also doesn’t exempt the wearer from the casting limit rule. Whenever a spellcaster gets a new set of spells, any spell slot she used in the last 8 hours is not available. This rule has nothing to do with how much sleep the spellcaster gets; it reflects how long a spell slot must remain empty before the character can refill it. The ring doesn’t make 8 hours pass, so it doesn’t help the character refill the used spell slot.
Just in case nobody read this (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a).

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 02:27 PM
All you people and your 4 encounters per day. Who Cares?
We have played games where we had no encounters in a day, and others where there were 30, you live with it and just try to get what you need done, and more importantly survive, I have a game where there are about 15 encounters, followed by a boss, as well as traps and such on the way, and I expect minimal casualties, all this in one dungeon where the players cannot rest, or leave, thats their fault though so...
Anyways, Wizard and Fighter Each have there strengths and weaknesses in this scenario, but I feel it is pointless to repeat what others have said.

You are not surviving 30 level appropriate encounters per day. If you are, then someone is running the encounters horribly wrong.

4 encounters/day is shorthand for 4 challenging encounters appropriate for your level/day. Plus all that other junk. Im not going to type out the entire paragraph every time I discuss appropriate encounters, since I assume others can read the SRD for themselves. That's the benchmark given to us for what's an appropriate level of encounters per day, and rules are also given to extrapolate that to higher/lower levels of encounter.

This is completely different from the premise that number is irrelevant, which is what you, and sometimes others, appear to be advocating.

Lycar
2009-10-29, 03:44 PM
You are not surviving 30 level appropriate encounters per day.

That... goes without saying. I'll give Thorcrest the benefit of doubt and assume that he was not talking about 30 challenging encounters a day... :smallamused:



4 encounters/day is shorthand for 4 challenging encounters appropriate for your level/day.
...
That's the benchmark given to us for what's an appropriate level of encounters per day, and rules are also given to extrapolate that to higher/lower levels of encounter.

This is completely different from the premise that number is irrelevant, which is what you, and sometimes others, appear to be advocating.

I can't quite parse your last sentence but.. yeah, pretty much. It is a benchmark. 4 challenging encounters a day is one of countless possible combinations of encounters that a party ought to be able to handle.

But it is not the holy writ 'you shall only have (4 encounters/day) ever and never shall you deviate from that sacred formula'.

But look at the various Magic vs. Rest of World threads: Every. Single. Time. This formula will be used, not as a yardstick but as the defining formula (usually for mage superiority).

Wizards can own 4/day. They can own even more if they only have to go nova on a single harsh encounter.

Melee advocates try to point out that more encounters means that the mage has to start conserve their spells and get shouted down.

Therefore it is important to keep saying it: An adventure day could (and frequently should, see page 49 DMG!) easily have more but less difficult encounters or, conversly, less but harder ones.

And the more encounters the day has, the more pressed will be those who have to expend resources that are not easily replaced... And HP replacement is pretty trivial as various others have pointed out before.

Yes, melee types will run out of rescources (HP) too eventually. But they have it much easier to 'recharge their batteries' and therefore can go a long way if need be.

Sure mages have Rings to regain a few spell levels. But those are a lot more limited then healing items and take up an even larger part of their WBL then comparative healing items.

All issues that get conveniently overlooked routinely.

Lycar

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 03:54 PM
Well, if you're significantly over the 4 encounters a day mark, then the average difficulty of those encounters should be decreasing, and with that, the resources expended should be decreasing.

When specifically discussing the difference between wizard resources and fighters...reserve feats are one way to change that balance. Yes, the resources are replenished differently, but over the very long term, you need to consider that meleers are using non-replenishable resources unless they are caster reliant in some way. Potions add up quickly.

Moff Chumley
2009-10-29, 03:59 PM
Oh, OotS. Editions may change, the years may go by, people may get banned, and yet there will always be people rehashing these same arguments. :smallbiggrin: It's comforting, in a way, to know that some things will never change.

Also, I hear 4e doesn't have balance issues. Maybe some of you guys should check that out!

Doc Roc
2009-10-29, 06:52 PM
Oh, OotS. Editions may change, the years may go by, people may get banned, and yet there will always be people rehashing these same arguments. :smallbiggrin: It's comforting, in a way, to know that some things will never change.

Also, I hear 4e doesn't have balance issues. Maybe some of you guys should check that out!

Eh, tried it. Not a bad game, but it's not OGL. OGL was a much bigger deal than d20 itself, at least for me.

So, Jones.

Write up an allow\ban list, some rules, and maybe some encounters, and I'll run this thing. You'll still need to find your players, but...

JonestheSpy
2009-10-29, 08:38 PM
So, Jones.

Write up an allow\ban list, some rules, and maybe some encounters, and I'll run this thing. You'll still need to find your players, but...

Hm, what a coincidence to be directly addressed by the last post after finally scanning this whole thing. Thanks for the offer there Doc, but I really meant this to be more of a thought experiment to challenge what seemed to be some very common assumptions when talking about classes, one of which of course is the ridiculous-but-common Putting two fresh characters in an arena match can determine which is "better" silliness. at least it seems like some people got the point (though it's pretty amusing that some people would rather argue endlessly about the minutae of how a couple of magic items actually work).

Really, I find the conventional wisdom about the strength of wizards, druids etc vs the lamesness of other classes to be similar to most conventional wisdom - not without a kernel of truth, but vastly oversimplified and tending to only come form one point of view, while ignoring some obvious holes in the theory (e.g. the low armor class of druids and their fuzzy friends).

AstralFire
2009-10-29, 08:48 PM
Armor Class is largely considered irrelevant by higher levels because of the rate at which to-hit increases, and the way miss chances aren't affected at all.

While I agree things are largely exaggerated, it is a bit more than a grain when you play the game at a certain level of instinctive optimization.

The Endbringer Xaraphim
2009-10-29, 09:32 PM
For the encounters/day: one thing that most people don't realize is that the party accepts as many encounters per day as they feel they can handle. If they start to run low after the first encounter they rest (rope trick, etc. if necessary). This doesn't work at level 1 or 2, but from 3+ the DM will have to engineer surprise encounters. And at 9th level there's teleport. Any mage worth his salt keeps a scroll handy.

Yes, scrolls can be lost. Yes, there's dead-magic zones, but these are atypical and are just another challenge for the party to overcome.

As to the dungeon scenario:

Encounter 1, fighter: Fighter is grappled by an earth elemental and pulled underground ~1,000 feet or so.

Encounter 1-20, wizard: Wizard scries the princess, goes invisible, teleports in and lays a handfull of delayed blast fireballs, grabs the girl, extends middle finger as a free action and 'ports out.

Dienekes
2009-10-29, 09:44 PM
Actually wouldn't the whole 4 encounters thing bring up the question. How many encounters would bring out the maximum level of balance between Wizard and Fighter (though I doubt it'll have too much of an affect)?

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 09:51 PM
Well, unless the fighter has access to *lots* of healing, he's effective until he runs out of HP, and the wizard is effective till he runs out of spells. Realistically, once you're at a decent level, fighters tend to run out of HP on appropriately ECLed fights faster than wizards run out of spells.

AstralFire
2009-10-29, 09:52 PM
Actually wouldn't the whole 4 encounters thing bring up the question. How many encounters would bring out the maximum level of balance between Wizard and Fighter (though I doubt it'll have too much of an affect)?

4-5, assuming that both the Wizard and the Fighter (or at least the Fighter) had a source of healing.

If they don't, zero.

lsfreak
2009-10-29, 10:10 PM
Assuming a party, WotC's borked CR system, and fighting monsters rather than optimized spellcasters.

If you have access to unlimited out-of-combat healing (or effectively unlimited, such as wands of lesser vigor), the fighter lasts forever, but things get really really tough after the wizard runs out of spells. The amount of disabling or buffing the wizard can do does wonders for the fighter's health.

If you don't have access to out-of-combat healing, the wizard lasts until he's out of spell slots, which can potentially be upwards of 20+ encounters depending on prepared spells and the exact enemies. The fighter, on the other hand, lasts about 2 rounds of combat where blows are exchanged thanks to how much damage high-level encounters can put out, especially if the monsters are rebuilt. The fighter's longevity is quite a bit longer than that though because he's either hitting monsters for dead (ubercharger) or the monsters aren't ever actually hitting him (thanks to the wizard).

[This is probably slight hyperbole, but fairly close to what I've seen]

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 10:14 PM
In fairness, if the fighter has access to wands of healing, we can presume the wizard has access to wands as well.

The big issue is how wand costs scale, so yeah....the wizard can cast grease all day via wands, or pop away with a reserve blasting feat, but his effectiveness is pretty harshly decreased.

Both can go a long, long time, if we're talking about fights a few ECL under the party, and the party is playing conservatively.

AstralFire
2009-10-29, 10:33 PM
I was thinking more like a Healer NPC following them around. Basically, if you tilt things in favor of the Fighter by giving him limitless HP between fights, then he comes in around the Wizard at fight 4 or 5, assuming the Wizard plays somewhere between Munchy and As Intended - let's call this Reasonably Optimal.

lsfreak
2009-10-29, 10:39 PM
I was thinking more like a Healer NPC following them around. Basically, if you tilt things in favor of the Fighter by giving him limitless HP between fights, then he comes in around the Wizard at fight 4 or 5, assuming the Wizard plays somewhere between Munchy and As Intended - let's call this Reasonably Optimal.

Even at "reasonable optimal," say 4 spells per encounter and a generalist, and the 13th level wizard mentioned in the other thread can still go between 7 and 8 encounters a day. A 13th level FS conjurer could potentially drop 10 spells per encounter and still last the 'recommended' 4 encounters per day.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 10:43 PM
Yeah...once your level gets up there, you really have to work at a proper nova to ever be in danger of running dry on spells.

And it's a rare, rare wizard that doesn't keep extra sources of magic stashed just in case. After all, they all have Scribe Scroll, so you may as well keep around copies of oddball stuff for that one time you need it. In normal games, people tend to horde consumables a bit more than the regular spell slots, because wealth is precious, but if absolutely necessary, they'll burn through them.

See, the thing about a Healer NPC is that he's got limited spell slots too, unless you're blatantly ignoring the rules. He's still useful for extending the adventuring day, but it's most definitely not limitless hp.

AstralFire
2009-10-29, 10:54 PM
Actually, in my experience, the wizard who scribes or uses magic items at all that he didn't find is rare - except online. The fact that they use an experience point cost at all causes a huge "Ngggggggk!" reaction in many players, who do not even read any further; years of many games have taught us that no trial is too steep, no cost too precious in order to get just a little bit more XP. Hence my suggestion of reasonably optimal is already scaled a bit downward (and is an excellent case of why it is hard to attempt to actually have a dialogue on the more common intermediaries between Josephine the Wizard High Lady and Jojo the Magic Girl What Sets **** On Fire.)

Most of the few people I've met who -do- take craft feats don't even ever think of using Scribe Scroll - why waste XP on being able to cast spells... I can already cast? is the thought process there. As a result, when speaking of 'practical' optimization (which, as we see, is based on personal experience), I almost never include crafting wands or scrolls. Even some people who know better (me!) still are 'ick' about crafting because it just feels wrong to voluntarily sacrifice XP! :smallyuk: Gold can be replaced, but experience?

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 11:04 PM
I must be the exception...I look at it and go 1xp for a level 1 scroll...hah, that'll never matter. I routinely keep anywhere from a dozen to three dozen scrolls on hand, and Im a big fan of eternal wands(though I sometimes have a regular as a backup for frequent stuff like CLW...yeah, I take cross class skills for UMD).

I certainly don't want to waste those scrolls, mind you, but death = a *lot* of xp and money lost. I will gladly scribe a pretty decent amount of scrolls to avoid that, and I guarantee I'll come out xp ahead.

imperialspectre
2009-10-29, 11:12 PM
Tyndmyr speaks very wisely on this question. A half-dozen XP and a few pieces of gold, in exchange for substantially increasing one's life expectancy on the rough days (and all parties have those!), is a very good trade at low levels. At higher levels, there's a reason that spells like Limited Wish (and Greater Restoration, for the clerics) are still considered "good" even at an XP cost.

AstralFire
2009-10-29, 11:18 PM
Well... yeah. I know.

I was speaking about the gut reactions of many players, one common enough in my circles.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 11:23 PM
Often. My current RL game has two rogues in the party, and until one of them hit level eight, I had the highest UMD modifier. It was a +1(stupid cross class skills and cha being a dump stat). I offered to give them scrolls at cost...just the gold cost, and they routinely turned me down.

Of course, I'm the one who had to save their dead, greedy butts after they overstretched themselves.

Yeah...people get greedy with trying to save a few gold and xp all the time, but there's no use getting caught up in the short term. At worst, a lot of crafting will put you a level behind the party for like...one encounter. That just means you get bonus xp for being behind. Problem solved.

Myrmex
2009-10-30, 01:59 AM
I was thinking more like a Healer NPC following them around. Basically, if you tilt things in favor of the Fighter by giving him limitless HP between fights, then he comes in around the Wizard at fight 4 or 5, assuming the Wizard plays somewhere between Munchy and As Intended - let's call this Reasonably Optimal.

If a fighter wants to spend his wealth on 750 gp wands of lesser vigor, how is that "tipping it in his favor"?

Kaiyanwang
2009-10-30, 03:20 AM
Also, I hear 4e doesn't have balance issues. Maybe some of you guys should check that out!

Assuming that this is not sarcasm, ... well no. No thanks.

As I always say, 4th edition is an answer to all of this as beheading is for headache.

More, I'm firmly sure that the unbalances are oversimplyfied and exaggerated. Yes, Druids are very powerful, but if you say that at fist level the animal companion makes the fighter useless, you are assuming that a riding dog is able to use a towershield to cover an angle of corridor or to use bow and arrows.

And if an armored riding dog is too powerful, fair enough, we will use a wolf. Next time, in a mini-party adventure, Druid + Rogue, we will use the riding dog in place of the tank, before the druid takes wild shape (level 5).

If you are able to use something, is not mandatory to use it always. Optimization is part of the fun of this game (and, BTW, does not hamper roleplaying quite the opposite), but is Int based. One must have enough Wis to know when stop.

I see a lot of people say:

- "I use only these classes, because X are too poweful and Y too weak"

- "Yadda yadda one trick pony because if you are out of range, the damage of the bow is not meaningful"

- "CR is broken we have to remake it"

- "Option Z is useless"

But these people continue to assume that their way of playing te game is the right one, and are even a little bit overlooking with those who don't share their point of view.

Couldn't be there another answer?

Killer Angel
2009-10-30, 03:39 AM
Couldn't be there another answer?

Certainly, but you know how it works on internet. The other answer is wrong. :smallbiggrin:

Kurald Galain
2009-10-30, 04:25 AM
Also, I hear 4e doesn't have balance issues. Maybe some of you guys should check that out!
Oh, it does. It also has broken stuff and infinite loops, but overall the bonuses are much smaller and "absolute" effects are rare. There just appears to be a consensus that 4E is not supposed to be balanced for PVP, so nobody much proposes fighter-vs-wizard trials there, afaik. But that's probably a matter for another thread.

Kaiyanwang
2009-10-30, 04:46 AM
Certainly, but you know how it works on internet. The other answer is wrong. :smallbiggrin:

Esatto. Pretty much.

Er.. one thing about CR: is not so good, anyway, I admit it without problems. At least, talking about books like MMII :smalleek:

Nevertheless, generally speaking (- MMII) one trick could be put the monster in a terrain or situation able to make the weight of his attacks and skills matter. Terrain is very important. Even combos of 2 different monsters with synergies are good.

Of course, if you assume that 3.x is 4 players vs 1 monster (even if happens)..

Killer Angel
2009-10-30, 05:04 AM
Er.. one thing about CR: is not so good, anyway, I admit it without problems. At least, talking about books like MMII :smalleek:


Don't forget MMIII... if I remember right, the Mezzoloth (yugoloth) has a CR 5, with hp near 100, DR 10, Yugoloth immunities, and cloudkill as SLA.
I risked a TPK.

Otodetu
2009-10-30, 06:14 AM
Omg, not this again, the fighter is a darn npc class, as are many other martial characters, flip out tomb of battle for real fighters.

Sorry, had to be said, the stuff a fighter can do any ettin can do too.

Kaiyanwang
2009-10-30, 06:37 AM
Omg, not this again, the fighter is a darn npc class, as are many other martial characters, flip out tomb of battle for real fighters.

Tomb of battle? A campaign with ToB + LM?



Sorry, had to be said, the stuff a fighter can do any ettin can do too.

An ettin fighter? sure.

See, I see the problems the class and the system has. But with the proper built and feats a fighter can be really fun, at leats in my experience.

Killer Angel
2009-10-30, 06:43 AM
Omg, not this again, the fighter is a darn npc class

Currently, on the topic, there is this not only thread, but also this one (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129672&page=14) (14 pages) and this other (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7207335#post7207335), so maybe there's something in it worth discussing, don't you think?

Kurald Galain
2009-10-30, 06:51 AM
Tomb of battle? A campaign with ToB + LM?
That's where the Tome of Horrors is stored...

Tyndmyr
2009-10-30, 07:43 AM
If a fighter wants to spend his wealth on 750 gp wands of lesser vigor, how is that "tipping it in his favor"?

It's not, save for ignoring the part that the wizard has WBL to spend too, and also can tack on endurance to his build in a variety of fairly easy ways.

AstralFire
2009-10-30, 10:25 AM
If a fighter wants to spend his wealth on 750 gp wands of lesser vigor, how is that "tipping it in his favor"?

...

Ctrl+F 'spend' 'purchase' 'buy' 'wands' not found.

Tipping in his favor is by assuming there's a free NPC following around to heal him.

Doc Roc
2009-10-30, 11:16 AM
Armor Class is largely considered irrelevant by higher levels because of the rate at which to-hit increases, and the way miss chances aren't affected at all.

While I agree things are largely exaggerated, it is a bit more than a grain when you play the game at a certain level of instinctive optimization.

I actually agree with Astral Fire here up to a point. I've done extensive AC optimization, and can regularly push my caster's AC into the low 60s. But miss chances are easier, and properly laid out, they can be very hard to obviate.

Doc Roc
2009-10-30, 11:20 AM
Hm, what a coincidence to be directly addressed by the last post after finally scanning this whole thing. Thanks for the offer there Doc, but I really meant this to be more of a thought experiment to challenge what seemed to be some very common assumptions when talking about classes, one of which of course is the ridiculous-but-common Putting two fresh characters in an arena match can determine which is "better" silliness. at least it seems like some people got the point (though it's pretty amusing that some people would rather argue endlessly about the minutae of how a couple of magic items actually work).

Really, I find the conventional wisdom about the strength of wizards, druids etc vs the lamesness of other classes to be similar to most conventional wisdom - not without a kernel of truth, but vastly oversimplified and tending to only come form one point of view, while ignoring some obvious holes in the theory (e.g. the low armor class of druids and their fuzzy friends).


Thought experiments are for things that aren't testable.

I will pull together a ToS dungeon run, if those rules are acceptable to you, and we will lay this bloody silliness to rest. I personally hold out that casters really are world-shakingly powerful but do benefit from the presence of mundanes until you reach the mid-spectrum of practical optimization. Though my spectrum differs from yours given what I know of it by our interactions.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-30, 12:52 PM
I will gladly participate, on Team Wizard.

JonestheSpy
2009-10-30, 07:21 PM
Thought experiments are for things that aren't testable.

I will pull together a ToS dungeon run, if those rules are acceptable to you, and we will lay this bloody silliness to rest. I personally hold out that casters really are world-shakingly powerful but do benefit from the presence of mundanes until you reach the mid-spectrum of practical optimization. Though my spectrum differs from yours given what I know of it by our interactions.

Go for it - I'm afraid my time commitments are such than online play isn't a good option for me, but I'd be curious what happens. Just remember that to settle the question definitely, you'd have to run multiple blind tests.

I'm not quite sure what exactly you'd be testing for, really. My hypothesis is that both classes would do pretty well with a chance of failure, and would end up in a similar state of depletion when finished. You'd definitely have to run something many many times to determine a trend.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-30, 07:54 PM
I think the idea is that you test to failure. You keep throwing identical challenges at both parties and see how long they can keep it up.

Doc Roc
2009-10-31, 04:19 AM
I'm willing to run it, but I will need players.

So, funny story:
While it's easy to claim that the "duels" between an ECL 20 fighter versus ECL 13 wizard is don't provide useful information, that's actually a interesting benchmark. The fighter should be able to kill 8 ECL 13 wizards per sitting, at least four sittings a day.

To turn this around, according to the EL\CR chart, it should take a team of 4 seventeenth level wizards to reliably consider attacking a 20th level fighter. This is suitable for the only encounter of the day, and should result in an almost certain death for one of the wizards. Under no circumstances, if the game approaches balance, should an ECL 13 wizard be able to kill an ECL 20 fighter in a fair fight. Particularly when that fighter has PC wealth instead of NPC wealth. According to the EL calculator, my chances of victory should be literally 0%.

Yukitsu
2009-10-31, 09:38 AM
ECL didn't account for me. :smallcool:

I'd join in in the dungeon trawl. Going to open this up in recruitment?

Ernir
2009-10-31, 11:52 AM
Show me a recruitment thread, and I'll post in it. :smalltongue:

Doc Roc
2009-10-31, 12:25 PM
Here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7226707#post7226707)
I will run the party with the wizard and the fighter in it.