PDA

View Full Version : Class vs class tests



Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 03:06 PM
Now, Im not taking signups yet...I simply want to discuss *how* this can be fairly done.

By what measure can we experimentally measure classes against each other? Pure theoretical comparisons seem to ultimately degenerate into increasingly improbable "Well, of COURSE I'd have already prepared immunity to the obscure poison only found in one line of splatbook Y!", so they are unlikely to get us anywhere. Obviously, we *have* to run tests...but what do we test?

Here are my suggestions, feel free to suggest modifications.

1. Need at least 4 volunteers of each class being tested against each other. One offs are too subject to luck.

2. Default level of testing is level 10, being at the midpoint of character development. For specific cases, different levels can be used.

3. No infinite combos. Saying "It's not infinite, it's just arbitrarily high" is grounds for being beaten. Otherwise, Raw is god. Other obviously broken things as determined via Test of Spite or The Arena may also be banned.

4. Participants shall be randomly paired off to be measured against each other.

5. Match type is either vs or solo against an encounter. Encounters are determined randomly in accordance with the book, and each pair of participants shall face the same challenge.

6. Location shall be determined randomly(need a good table), and again, each pair will fight in identical locations.

7. Participants can spend WBL at will. Participants can also elect to start at a lower level due to ECL, spending xp on magic items, etc.

Thoughts?

Im thinking Fighters vs Monks might be an interesting first match, for maximum drama.

Boci
2009-10-29, 03:08 PM
What’s the ruling on the guidelines for custom magic items? I've seen quite a few of these types of builds reliant on them.

Yukitsu
2009-10-29, 03:11 PM
Since the item creation tables are guidelines, and not hard rules, it's pretty much impossible to say that they can be used in this sort of test. It's hard to objectively gauge the value of any effect when doing these sorts of comparisons.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 03:26 PM
I lean torwards allowing them, since they're core, and frankly, most people are familiar with using them.

I think regardless of their inclusion or exclusion, it should balance out by virtue of both sides having them. And whichever way is standard, people might wish to run usual tests occasionally...it's just easier to have a standard set of rules and deviate from there rather than arguing over every single detail every time.

sofawall
2009-10-29, 03:30 PM
I lean torwards allowing them, since they're core, and frankly, most people are familiar with using them.

I think regardless of their inclusion or exclusion, it should balance out by virtue of both sides having them. And whichever way is standard, people might wish to run usual tests occasionally...it's just easier to have a standard set of rules and deviate from there rather than arguing over every single detail every time.

Wait, that's like me saying "Sure, you can use that! It's in Serpent Kingdoms after all!"

Sinfire Titan
2009-10-29, 03:31 PM
I lean torwards allowing them, since they're core, and frankly, most people are familiar with using them.

I think regardless of their inclusion or exclusion, it should balance out by virtue of both sides having them. And whichever way is standard, people might wish to run usual tests occasionally...it's just easier to have a standard set of rules and deviate from there rather than arguing over every single detail every time.

The problem comes from the crafting system itself, not who has access to it. Price reducers are easy to add if the caster is the one making the item, making it easier on their WBL (not that they can't bypass that too). Noncasters have a harder time doing that.

It's better to not allow them.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 03:34 PM
Hmmm, would it be ok to include them if we don't allow player crafting? After all, crafting for one-offs is kind of odd anyhow.

Giving casters an advantages in WBL isn't really the goal, but I want to be as flexible as possible in allowing different builds.

Sinfire Titan
2009-10-29, 03:36 PM
Hmmm, would it be ok to include them if we don't allow player crafting? After all, crafting for one-offs is kind of odd anyhow.

Giving casters an advantages in WBL isn't really the goal, but I want to be as flexible as possible in allowing different builds.

Not really. I honestly recommend not using it at all.

truemane
2009-10-29, 03:36 PM
I agree that custom items should not be allowed. The goal is to reduce the variables as much as is reasonable. If everyone is limited to the same list of options, it makes it easier to decide how much impact comes from use of those options.

Although, to make this work, you need to be very careful in your success/failure criteria.

Yukitsu
2009-10-29, 03:36 PM
When a particular build absolutely "must" have custom item X, then you're not testing classes any more. You're testing who can cover more bases with their wealth.

Ernir
2009-10-29, 03:40 PM
I think regardless of their inclusion or exclusion, it should balance out by virtue of both sides having them.

Some classes lean much more heavily on them than others, though. Truenamer, I am looking at you! :smallfrown:

And on RAWIsLaw, the extent to which you will want to follow that depends on the optimization experience of your testers, I'd say. Something like the ToS set is necessary if people are going to be pushing the boundaries.

Your biggest problem, though, will be to make sure the classes are being put to the test, not items, feats, or spells.
(In the Wizard vs. Fighter tests that I am running now, we aren't testing the classes. We are testing 13th level Wizard casting vs. 20th level WBL on a useless chassis.)

Yukitsu
2009-10-29, 03:42 PM
Hey, I wasn't just fighting a WBL on a useless chassis! He also had a monk!

Kurald Galain
2009-10-29, 03:43 PM
I don't think any class v class test would actually put a stop to the debate, though. Still, they're fun to watch. Your rules seem mostly fair, but note that the Test of Spite has a huge banned list by now.

(edit) oh yeah, with respect to class v class tests (as opposed to character v character tests), you have to define "class". Is a Wizard/Archmage still a wizard? How about a Fighter/Dungeon Crasher? Is a Monk/Druid considered a monk or a druid, or both? And so forth.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 03:46 PM
When a particular build absolutely "must" have custom item X, then you're not testing classes any more. You're testing who can cover more bases with their wealth.

This is an excellent point. While synergy with magic items is a good thing for a class to have, it's not the only aspect.

No custom items it is.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 03:49 PM
I don't think any class v class test would actually put a stop to the debate, though. Still, they're fun to watch. Your rules seem mostly fair, but note that the Test of Spite has a huge banned list by now.

(edit) oh yeah, with respect to class v class tests (as opposed to character v character tests), you have to define "class". Is a Wizard/Archmage still a wizard? How about a Fighter/Dungeon Crasher? Is a Monk/Druid considered a monk or a druid, or both? And so forth.

I would tend to say that for purposes of, say, Fighter vrs Monk, a Monk/Drunken Master would count as a Monk, but a Monk/Druid would not.

In other words, available PrCs for a class are part of what makes a class good or bad. The presence of other base classes is not, and should not be used in such a test.

Defiant
2009-10-29, 03:50 PM
I create a ring of Mage Armour for 2000gp, according to the item creation rules (spell level 1 * caster level 1 * continuous 2000).

Defiant
2009-10-29, 03:51 PM
No custom items it is.

Exactly what is and what isn't a custom item? Anything not directly listed in the Wondrous Items list from the SRD?

Eldariel
2009-10-29, 03:53 PM
Exactly what is and what isn't a custom item? Anything not directly listed in the Wondrous Items list from the SRD?

If you have to go to the item creation guidelines and start counting the costs of the item from there, it's a custom item. The ones listed are not custom.

Boci
2009-10-29, 03:54 PM
Exactly what is and what isn't a custom item? Anything not directly listed in the Wondrous Items list from the SRD?

Anything made using the guidlines in the DMG.

Yukitsu
2009-10-29, 03:54 PM
Anything that doesn't have an explicit listing in any of the magic item lists in the source books that are allowed would be custom.

Claudius Maximus
2009-10-29, 03:56 PM
How about allowing custom potions and wands, and other such items?

Boci
2009-10-29, 03:57 PM
How about allowing custom potions and wands, and other such items?

I'm pretty sure the RAW are that any non-personal spell 3rd level or lower can be a potion and any spell 4th or lower can be a wand.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 03:57 PM
Exactly what is and what isn't a custom item? Anything not directly listed in the Wondrous Items list from the SRD?

Anything listed as an item is not custom, and thus, is available. Anything that explicitly sends you to your DM for permission first *is* custom.

I believe neither the scrolls nor wands require DM permission, and have explicit prices given, so those should be fine...there's a rather large volume of premade magic items out there, especially in MiC, so it shouldn't be *that* limiting.

sofawall
2009-10-29, 03:59 PM
But can you make them at higher-than-minimum caster level?

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 04:05 PM
I believe the DMG explicitly says that you can.

Now, Im wondering on the PC vs Mob part of this. As for what the mob is, randomly rolling one of all the mobs from the various MMs of the appropriate CL is doable...but is a simple PC vs one mob too alpha-strike biased, or should we go for something based on the standard reccomended daily allowance of ass-kicking?

Claudius Maximus
2009-10-29, 04:19 PM
What will be the medium of these tests? PVP matches? Arena battles vs. level appropriate encounters? A dungeon crawl like The Monkening? A solo dungeon crawl? Something else? All of the above?

Yukitsu
2009-10-29, 04:23 PM
I think whatever people happen to think is most valid at the time. I know I've done all of the above before, and have won them with wizards.

Doing all of those gives you the most complete picture, as opposed to just knowing that class X can or can't do challenge X, Y or Z.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 04:44 PM
I think all of the above is best. Or, more likely, to keep the test from taking too long, randomly get one of the above. Note...randomly determined post character-creation. So, if you have a team of five fighters and five monks, you create your characters, then get randomly paired off. A random challenge or two is rolled up for each pair.

If one can defeat the challenge and the other can not, it's a clear win. If both can defeat it, then speed of defeating it is probably the tie breaker. If the number of rounds are the same...damage taken can be the tie breaker. If that's still equal...it's a tie.

If neither can defeat the challenges, the one who got further/got the most kills is victorious.

Faleldir
2009-10-29, 04:46 PM
I Craft an item of continuous True Strike for 8000 GP. What? It's Core!

Boci
2009-10-29, 05:00 PM
I Craft an item of continuous True Strike for 8000 GP. What? It's Core!

Too bad such an item has already been forbiden.

Faleldir
2009-10-29, 05:07 PM
Really? I believe you, but I'd like to know where, in case this problem comes up in a game.

Claudius Maximus
2009-10-29, 05:35 PM
No custom items it is.

Here's where.

Glimbur
2009-10-29, 05:51 PM
Are we using the guideline of consumables costing 5x as much because it's a one-shot?

Indon
2009-10-29, 06:17 PM
7. Participants can spend WBL at will. Participants can also elect to start at a lower level due to ECL, spending xp on magic items, etc.

Thoughts?

There are some really horrible ways to cheese out with magic items that aren't infinite loops. I'd mentioned Mirrors of Opposition in the Fighter vs. Wizard thread, and it remains a good example.

lsfreak
2009-10-29, 06:27 PM
Are we using the guideline of consumables costing 5x as much because it's a one-shot?

It should be no, I think. For one-shot adventures, things cost 5x as much so that you don't spend a huge chunk of gold on items that push you way past the 'balancing point' of 4 encounters/day.

I'd ban thought bottles so that people don't mess with those with pre-crafting. Also, LA buyoff?

Claudius Maximus
2009-10-29, 06:37 PM
You should put forth a list of rules for this, if you're serious about it. The change/ban list for the Test of Spite may be a good starting point. We've dealt with most of the more egregious offenders. Change whatever you don't like.

Faleldir
2009-10-29, 06:56 PM
Here's where.
I don't get it. Is there a rule that prevents me from Crafting a continuous item of True Strike or not?

lsfreak
2009-10-29, 06:59 PM
I don't get it. Is there a rule that prevents me from Crafting a continuous item of True Strike or not?

There's no rule that lets you do it because there's no rules for custom item creation.
There are guidelines that are completely up to DM discretion.

Boci
2009-10-29, 06:59 PM
I don't get it. Is there a rule that prevents me from Crafting a continuous item of True Strike or not?

For the purpose of this test yes. For the actually game commom sense, the fact that the continuous spells are just guidelines.

Also it might only work at will, which isn't all that broken, although should still cost more 8k.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 09:39 PM
You should put forth a list of rules for this, if you're serious about it. The change/ban list for the Test of Spite may be a good starting point. We've dealt with most of the more egregious offenders. Change whatever you don't like.

Oh, I fully plan on blatantly trolling through that list and the arena rules list to get rid of the more ridiculously exploitable things. The idea is to see which class is better, not who discovered the most broken magic item.

IMO, don't bother with the 5x consumable price. Given the portion of WBL usually consumed by potions, it's not that huge of a deal anyhow.

LA buyoff...I tend to think sure on this. Most of the high LA races are overcosted anyhow, and by level 10, the initial power boost should have leveled off. Ghost will, of course, need to be banned.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-29, 11:00 PM
Ok...so, level 10 encounters.

CR 10-13 mobs should be Overpowering(5%)
CR 7-9 are Very Difficult(15%)
CR 6 is Challenging(50%)
CR 2-5 is Easy(10%)

I vote we ignore the "easy if handled properly" category because it's a bit subjective, and "handled properly" is generally a player skill test, not a test of your class. This gives us a decent randomization table for NPC encounters.

Roll a D??
1-2 - CR2 Encounter
3-4 - CR3 Encounter
5-7 - CR4 Encounter
8-10 - CR5 Encounter
11-50 - CR6 Encounter
51-55 - CR7 Encounter
56-60 - CR8 Encounter
61-65 - CR9 Encounter
66-67 - CR10 Encounter
68 - CR11 Encounter
69 - CR12 Encounter
70 - CR13 Encounter

The evil part of me wants to tack on 71-roll twice on this table, apply both results, but Im not sure it'd be terribly fair.

So, if NPC battles are rolled up, four encounters get rolled up. Three random delays get rolled up between fights.

Roll a d3.
1-hours. Roll a d4+1 to find out how long the break is.
2-minutes. Roll a d60 to find out how long the break is.
3-Rounds. Roll a d8+1 to find out how long the break is.

This should keep a good mixture of everything from back to back fights to rather spaced out fights, both of which can happen in normal play.

Dimers
2009-10-29, 11:48 PM
I don't get it. Is there a rule that prevents me from Crafting a continuous item of True Strike or not?

I'm quoting from an explanation of magic item creation written by Skip Williams, found here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050118a) on the WOTC site. Near the top, he says "Assigning a market price to a magic item is covered in detail in Chapter 7 of the Dungeon Master's Guide. See Table 7-33. Items that provide simple bonuses to attacks, Armor Class, saving throws, or checks are fairly easy to evaluate." Then, under the "Use the Correct Formula" section, he specifically notes the continuous item of true strike and shows how an evaluation of its worth ought to be done (namely, per the 'bonus to attack').

No, you're not the first one to think of doing that :smallsmile:

Eloel
2009-10-30, 12:07 AM
Continous True Strike items SHOULD exist. But they should exist on a purely RAW basis. True Strike gives +20 to your first attack roll in 1 round. Continous True Strike gives +20 to your first attack roll whenever, but is useless after you make a single attack.

Kurald Galain
2009-10-30, 03:43 AM
IMO, don't bother with the 5x consumable price. Given the portion of WBL usually consumed by potions, it's not that huge of a deal anyhow.

I do believe it should be there, particularly for scrolls and wands. There's some serious cheese potential otherwise.

Yukitsu
2009-10-30, 11:27 AM
Forgot to say, you'll want to test non-combat solutions as well. If a class can defeat any enemy in combat, but has a 100% chance of falling off a cliff and dying, even if he isn't near a cliff, he's still useless. Surviving traps, getting around them, surviving weather, getting across boundaries. These are all important things that one should have to consider when discussing the use of a class.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-30, 11:34 AM
So then, skill checks on the random maps.

Shall we say then, four traps per run? One targetting each save, and a ranged touch attack? Half of them magical. Nothing strong enough to instagib, unless a character is quite fragile, but enough that just taking the hit is going to hurt you.

Traps are one of the easier skill checks. Swim/climb/other mobility skills are determined by which of the random maps you get. If you have no swim, crap strength, and wear armor, pray you don't get an aquatic fight?

Tumble, spellcraft, concentration, etc are all used in combat, so they need nothing special in themselves.

Are we going to bother with social skills at all, or is that a little too difficult to test fairly?

Yukitsu
2009-10-30, 11:46 AM
9/10ths of the time, you only need one person who can talk. For things like scaling sheer cliffs in an anti magic zone while fighting off viscous ooze harpies, you rather need the whole team on board with that whole climbing thing. Traps are kind of like that as well, but I find many parties I'm in don't have rogues.

And yes, I did just spell a word horribly wrong and run with it.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-30, 02:11 PM
Yeah. Multiple party faces rarely adds anything to the party. Having only one guy that can swim is a problem when the boat sinks.

Looking over potions and such...and yeah, I guess using one shot pricing rules makes more sense. Otherwise, temp buffs are horribly unbalanced vs gear.