PDA

View Full Version : High level non-magic characters [3.5]



Lysander
2010-01-29, 10:30 AM
At high levels full casters are generally considered much more powerful than straight combat types like fighters or rogues. It might be the whole "create your own private universe" stuff that wizards are doing while fighters are still using horses to get around.

But could it be that high level non-casters aren't overpowered but that melee types are underpowered? What if they had high level feats like these to choose from?


Swiftness

Benefit: You may take two turns every round. The first is determined by your initiative, the second is the last action in the round after all other characters. If multiple people have the Swiftness feat their initiative determines the order of second turns.

Spell Invulnerability

Benefit: All harmful spells subject to SR have a 20% chance of automatically failing to affect you.

Great Leadership

Benefit: You can have up to three cohorts. Your cohorts also gain the leadership feat and can have cohorts and followers of their own.



I'm not suggesting these specific feats, but just to point out the kind of thing that could help. This isn't just a bonus to hit or an additional attack. It's a major change to the mechanic of the game.

I kind of think that high level melee characters should basically become superheroes. Even more so than now. A level 20 wizard with full buffs, summoned minions, shapechange, firing off high level spells, should still lose to a level 20 fighter in direct combat. The fighter should simply be that astounding, less Conan the Barbarian and more Hercules. A magician's only chance would be to outwit the fighter and lead them into a trap they've carefully prepared spells for.

Aharon
2010-01-29, 10:57 AM
There are people who agree with you. Lot's of Material similar to that was created by the Gaming Den. You can find that material
here (http://middendorfproject.googlepages.com/frankpdf). Be warned that the martial classes outlined within are balanced against optimized wizards, so including them when the casters in your game aren't optimized, they might be stronger.
It also has the disadvantage of totally discarding the Wealth by Level concept - you may be uncomfortable with that.

Mushroom Ninja
2010-01-29, 11:43 AM
You'd have to make sure that the feats have requirements that casters can't meet.

Lysander
2010-01-29, 12:14 PM
You'd have to make sure that the feats have requirements that casters can't meet.

Yeah, they'd have requirements like high BaB, a certain number of hitpoints, high str/dex/con.

Salanmander
2010-01-29, 12:23 PM
It may be that you'd want to give them even more anti-caster protection, sortof like Mage Slayer has. Like "a character with this feat who casts a spell of above 5th level permanently loses use of this feat" or something like that. I'd be worried about gish builds otherwise.

Sinfire Titan
2010-01-29, 12:24 PM
Yeah, they'd have requirements like high BaB, a certain number of hitpoints, high str/dex/con.

Not enough. Class features almost always make better requirements. BAB, HP, and ability scores can all be boosted, but class features can rarely be replicated.


Sorry Fighter...

Lysander
2010-01-29, 12:28 PM
Not enough. Class features almost always make better requirements. BAB, HP, and ability scores can all be boosted, but class features can rarely be replicated.


Sorry Fighter...

Another requirement could be to have a certain number of fighter feats. You wouldn't necessarily have to be a fighter, but you'd need those feats.

MichielHagen
2010-01-29, 12:29 PM
Not enough. Class features almost always make better requirements. BAB, HP, and ability scores can all be boosted, but class features can rarely be replicated.


Sorry Fighter...

There are tons of ways, one of which is Fighter inspired...


Prerequisites: Proficiency with selected weapon, Weapon Focus with selected weapon, fighter level 4th.

You can pick exactly the classes you want boosted and at what level you want it available, what more do you want?

Person_Man
2010-01-29, 12:51 PM
Do you consider the Binder, Psychic Warrior, Totemist, Incarnate, Swordsage, Crusader, Warblade, and/or Knight magic? Because I would say that the real problem is that core-ish melee classes were just poorly written, and that full casters just need to avoid the more abusive spells and combos.

Riffington
2010-01-29, 02:00 PM
You should add abilities (set or from a menu of choices, like rogues have) to the base melee classes if you're going to do this, not just add feats.

3 reasons:
1. if it's a feat there's no good reason a caster shouldn't get it.
2. the whole "melee means multiclassing" thing is old and this'd discourage that a bit.
3. This becomes a "feat tax" since everyone who can take these takes them, which makes it hard to specialize.

Milskidasith
2010-01-29, 02:02 PM
I kind of think that high level melee characters should basically become superheroes. Even more so than now. A level 20 wizard with full buffs, summoned minions, shapechange, firing off high level spells, should still lose to a level 20 fighter in direct combat. The fighter should simply be that astounding, less Conan the Barbarian and more Hercules. A magician's only chance would be to outwit the fighter and lead them into a trap they've carefully prepared spells for.

OK, this philosophy is as flawed as the one you are trying to stop. Yes, wizards are unbalanced... but why should a fighter 20 automatically win when the wizard has blown all his spell slots on buffs and summons? If that would work, that would simply reverse the tier lists and the game would still be as broken.

Salanmander
2010-01-29, 02:20 PM
OK, this philosophy is as flawed as the one you are trying to stop. Yes, wizards are unbalanced... but why should a fighter 20 automatically win when the wizard has blown all his spell slots on buffs and summons? If that would work, that would simply reverse the tier lists and the game would still be as broken.

The thought that class A should beat class B in a straight 1v1 fight does not necessarily make class A better than class B. Class B may be better at dealing with hordes of enemies, for example. The metric for tiers is how useful they are in how wide a variety of situations commonly encountered when adventuring in a party.

Oslecamo
2010-01-29, 02:21 PM
You should add abilities (set or from a menu of choices, like rogues have) to the base melee classes if you're going to do this, not just add feats.


Been there, done that. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137125)

The "Noncasters can't have nice things!" crowd rallied against it. Wich means I was in the right track. Nobody complains when there's a gish homebrew with fullcasting, BAB and other juicy bonus on top, but giving spell-level abilities to the fighter? Heresy!

Altough another thing I say that must be done is changing the base rules themselves. When you're flying, and you're hit, you should need to save or drop down on the ground (and get hurt from that). You should also get a penalty to AC since you've got nowhere to hide. This isn't just against casters, but also, well, every flying monster out there. Right now, flying is always better than walking. You have no disadvantages whatsoever! Except maneuverability, ok, but it's pretty easy to get it perfect.

Heavy armor should actualy protect you, not hinder you in such a way that nobody really wants to wear fullplate unless they have crippled speed and dexterity to begin with. Armor should count to touch AC (or just half) if built of the right shiny material.

Magic weapons should be able to breack magic, just like normal weapons can breack everything mundane. A wall of force would have big DR and HP, but a supercharger with a magic axe would go right trough it. A wall of wind would fall under a rain of magic arrows from a high level ranger.

Etc etc.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-29, 02:25 PM
Epic Dodge is like this. You declare it vs a target. You auto-dodge any attack they target on you. This applies to things like orbs. It's prereqs make it pretty non accessible for full casters.

Optimystik
2010-01-29, 02:28 PM
Epic Dodge is like this. You declare it vs a target. You auto-dodge any attack they target on you. This applies to things like orbs. It's prereqs make it pretty non accessible for full casters.

At which point they quicken a ray of frost to make you waste it, then smack you with the twinmaxed fell drain force orb they really wanted to hit you with.

That, or just use grease to force a balance check and you can't dodge anymore, epically or otherwise.

Milskidasith
2010-01-29, 02:42 PM
The thought that class A should beat class B in a straight 1v1 fight does not necessarily make class A better than class B. Class B may be better at dealing with hordes of enemies, for example. The metric for tiers is how useful they are in how wide a variety of situations commonly encountered when adventuring in a party.

I know that. That does not change the flaws with the philosophy of "fighters should beat a wizard and his summoned army easily," especially because if a fighter can beat a wizard buffed up and a summoned army of creatures, he already has all the versatility of the wizard and AoE clearing just to defend against that.


Been there, done that. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137125)

The "Noncasters can't have nice things!" crowd rallied against it. Wich means I was in the right track. Nobody complains when there's a gish homebrew with fullcasting, BAB and other juicy bonus on top, but giving spell-level abilities to the fighter? Heresy!

Altough another thing I say that must be done is changing the base rules themselves. When you're flying, and you're hit, you should need to save or drop down on the ground (and get hurt from that). You should also get a penalty to AC since you've got nowhere to hide. This isn't just against casters, but also, well, every flying monster out there. Right now, flying is always better than walking. You have no disadvantages whatsoever! Except maneuverability, ok, but it's pretty easy to get it perfect.

Heavy armor should actualy protect you, not hinder you in such a way that nobody really wants to wear fullplate unless they have crippled speed and dexterity to begin with. Armor should count to touch AC (or just half) if built of the right shiny material.

Magic weapons should be able to breack magic, just like normal weapons can breack everything mundane. A wall of force would have big DR and HP, but a supercharger with a magic axe would go right trough it. A wall of wind would fall under a rain of magic arrows from a high level ranger.

Etc etc.

Don't take me out of context on this. The problems with your class were as stated in the thread, and I believe we even had reached the point where you were listening to the PEACH you asked for, and now you've decided to use it in another thread to say how great your ideas were while the big bad "melee can't have nice things" crowd ruined it for you. In reality, your class was horribly overpowered with no clear design intent besides "be awesome," no fluff besides "I'm awesome" and abilities that created infinite damage combos and allowed you to ignore most everything. Just because wizards can do such broken cheese doesn't mean you have to give it out as a class feature.

Beorn080
2010-01-29, 03:00 PM
At a minimum, I think all non magical classes should get UMD as a class skill.

Spells seem to be the major problem. I mean, at 9th level, a wizard with a couple of weeks off can make a small mountain out of nothing with just the wall of stone spell. At 20th, with bonus spells and using every slot, that same wizard could make a mountain in a day. The fighter is lucky if he can dig a 20ft hole in a day at 20th level. So UMD would be a must at a minimum. Perhaps there should be a WBL adjustment for classes, with wizards and divine casters getting the base, sorcerors and bards getting a small bonus, and the non magical crowd getting maybe 50% over. I mean, wizards and divine casters pretty much get free world altering abilities as they go up, plus all the nifty trinkets allowed by WBL. The small bonus to sorcerors and bards is due to the limited normal spell list, making them more capable then the nonmagicals, but still not able to do whatever they want.

Gnaeus
2010-01-29, 03:12 PM
Perhaps there should be a WBL adjustment for classes, with wizards and divine casters getting the base, sorcerors and bards getting a small bonus, and the non magical crowd getting maybe 50% over. I mean, wizards and divine casters pretty much get free world altering abilities as they go up, plus all the nifty trinkets allowed by WBL.

I suppose you could do that if you started at high level, but it seems like pretty twisted logic to apply as a universal law during roleplaying. I mean, the wizard and the druid slay the boss, then the fighter walks up and says, "I am non magic, I get an extra share!". Any party that would agree to that is running such a cooperative game that the low tier classes probably aren't in trouble anyway.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-29, 03:20 PM
At which point they quicken a ray of frost to make you waste it, then smack you with the twinmaxed fell drain force orb they really wanted to hit you with.

That, or just use grease to force a balance check and you can't dodge anymore, epically or otherwise.

Waste it? It means you avoid the first attack per round. That hits you. So, even if they expend their quickened slot every round to negate it...it's not like they were going to not cast that quickened spell anyhow. It also means that unless both hit, they do absolutely nothing, and the quickened true strike before loosing the death orb isn't a viable option.

For a single feat, that ain't bad.

Yes, it does jack against AOEs, but it has improved evasion as a prereq. Presumably anyone with that isn't horribly worried about reflex saves to begin with.

Also keep in mind that epic saves increase at a constant point per two levels. Save DCs, on the other hand, increase by once per eight levels, assuming that's where you put your points. Sure, feats can boost that higher, but each feat invested in saves by the fighter gives a +4 to the save.

So really, it's not quite so crazy as it first appears.


Alternatively, or in combination, you have the epic feat Self Concealment. 10% miss chance for all attacks on you. It stacks with itself up to 50%.

So, it's quite possible to build an epic melee character that's rather hard for a caster to nuke to oblivion. Sure, surprise gets more important...but 3.5 has always been extremely rocket-tag like when it comes to surprise, with optimized characters.

Beorn080
2010-01-29, 03:29 PM
I suppose you could do that if you started at high level, but it seems like pretty twisted logic to apply as a universal law during roleplaying. I mean, the wizard and the druid slay the boss, then the fighter walks up and says, "I am non magic, I get an extra share!". Any party that would agree to that is running such a cooperative game that the low tier classes probably aren't in trouble anyway.

Then remove the free spell parts of wizards and divine casters. Make it so they have to do research or donate gold/sacrifice a magic item to their diety/powersource to get more spells. Or never directly reward the magic users for their help. Take Roy vs Slavers. V didn't get any new trinkets, but Roy got himself a snazzy belt and Belkar got Spice. There are other ways of awarding loot other then the standard "Dragon's dead, here's your cut."

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 03:30 PM
At high levels full casters are generally considered much more powerful than straight combat types like fighters or rogues. It might be the whole "create your own private universe" stuff that wizards are doing while fighters are still using horses to get around.

But could it be that high level non-casters aren't overpowered but that melee types are underpowered? What if they had high level feats like these to choose from?



I'm not suggesting these specific feats, but just to point out the kind of thing that could help. This isn't just a bonus to hit or an additional attack. It's a major change to the mechanic of the game.

I kind of think that high level melee characters should basically become superheroes. Even more so than now. A level 20 wizard with full buffs, summoned minions, shapechange, firing off high level spells, should still lose to a level 20 fighter in direct combat. The fighter should simply be that astounding, less Conan the Barbarian and more Hercules. A magician's only chance would be to outwit the fighter and lead them into a trap they've carefully prepared spells for.

I'm not sure about some of the other stuff posted so far, but to answer your initial question: yes and no. Spellcasters are broken in such a way that a party of them basically ruins the game. Basically to balance things you need to a) weaken the more broken spellcaster options b)strengthen the underpowered spellcaster options (I'm looking at you evocation) and C) make the melee classes stronger. As for the last part, a Wizard should be able to beat a Fighter, but not through buffs. A Wizard should have to use clever use of spells to beat a fighter. There should be a back and forth, with more skilled Wizards being able to beat less skilled Fighters and vice versa.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-29, 03:31 PM
Then remove the free spell parts of wizards and divine casters. Make it so they have to do research or donate gold/sacrifice a magic item to their diety/powersource to get more spells.

Uh, wizards do have to pay gold and spend time to get new spells in their books. Yes, some groups skip over this in their dislike of bookkeeping, but it's a non-trivial gold/time cost for wizards who want to collect a diverse list of spells.

Now, adding a similar thing for divine casters is reasonable.

Beorn080
2010-01-29, 03:35 PM
Uh, wizards do have to pay gold and spend time to get new spells in their books. Yes, some groups skip over this in their dislike of bookkeeping, but it's a non-trivial gold/time cost for wizards who want to collect a diverse list of spells.

Now, adding a similar thing for divine casters is reasonable.

I was referring to the two free spells per level that they get. Just making those require a gold investment would allow the non magical characters to catch up slightly to wizards. Naturally, if you remove all gold costs from wizards getting new spells, WBL becomes seriously unbalanced.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-29, 03:42 PM
I like the free spells per level in there, as I think it provides a useful power baseline, and avoids DMs nerfing casters into oblivion by simply not providing them any spell access whatsoever. Frankly, without any spells, a caster would be a terrible choice.

I think you'd gain more by adjusting the cost to scribe spells than you would in taking away the free spells. After all, adjusting the cost tends to hurt casters in low-spell availability campaigns least, and in magic mart worlds the most....ie, in perfect proportion with the expected power of the wizard.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 03:45 PM
I like the free spells per level in there, as I think it provides a useful power baseline, and avoids DMs nerfing casters into oblivion by simply not providing them any spell access whatsoever. Frankly, without any spells, a caster would be a terrible choice.

I think you'd gain more by adjusting the cost to scribe spells than you would in taking away the free spells. After all, adjusting the cost tends to hurt casters in low-spell availability campaigns least, and in magic mart worlds the most....ie, in perfect proportion with the expected power of the wizard.

I don't think I understand you. Adjusting the cost hurts wizards far less in magic mart worlds, since he can just buy them. Also magic mart worlds are much better for non casters than casters, since it allows them to get twinked gear, which helps them much more than it helps wizards, and it gets them umd.

Sinfire Titan
2010-01-29, 03:53 PM
I don't think I understand you. Adjusting the cost hurts wizards far less in magic mart worlds, since he can just buy them. Also magic mart worlds are much better for non casters than casters, since it allows them to get twinked gear, which helps them much more than it helps wizards, and it gets them umd.

He means increasing the cost to buy spells. As is, it's Scroll's price+Ink price as the most expensive method, and the cheapest is to pay for the Ink and 50gp/spell level by copying it from another Wizard. Remove the second option and Wizards now need a tad more of their WBL to work with. Doubling the price of some scrolls also works.

Edit: Also, adding an XP cost of 100/level of the spell will help control it. Smart players will avoid doing so, while optimizers familiar with the system will know that doing so only slows them down a little bit, and actually helps them level up.

Beorn080
2010-01-29, 03:58 PM
The free spells per level is a problem, especially if WBL is strictly adhered to. As I said before, at 9th level, and without spending a single gold, a wizard can make a mountain fortress for himself using wall of stone, given enough time, simply because he got two spells for free. The fighter gets nothing for free. Indeed, strip a fighter, and you have nothing, while a wizard stripped can still use read magic at a minimum. The fighter has to purchase everything, whereas a smart wizard can make pretty much anything from nothing. At 11th, a wizard breaks the WBL with Wall of Iron, letting him pretty much do whatever he wants.

Note that I am merely using Wizard and Fighter as the "standard" magical and melee classes. It pretty much applies across the board.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-29, 04:08 PM
He means increasing the cost to buy spells. As is, it's Scroll's price+Ink price as the most expensive method, and the cheapest is to pay for the Ink and 50gp/spell level by copying it from another Wizard. Remove the second option and Wizards now need a tad more of their WBL to work with. Doubling the price of some scrolls also works.

Right. Remember that copying off a scroll burns it.

Also, the most powerful wizards are those with the most spells(as a general rule of thumb...exceptions like killer gnomes exist). So, an overall price increase hurts the most powerful wizards the most.


Edit: Also, adding an XP cost of 100/level of the spell will help control it. Smart players will avoid doing so, while optimizers familiar with the system will know that doing so only slows them down a little bit, and actually helps them level up.

I would avoid an xp cost, as it penalizes only non-optimizers. Casters tend to lag a bit behind party level anyhow, due to item creation and spells that require xp, so spending more really....doesn't matter at all. The most this will do is add bookkeeping and discourage inexperienced wizards from stocking up on spells.

I prefer solutions that try to mitigate overall power disparity, including between optimizers and non-optimizers, since, IMO, balance between casters and melee is only one part of the balance issue.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 04:08 PM
The free spells per level is a problem, especially if WBL is strictly adhered to. As I said before, at 9th level, and without spending a single gold, a wizard can make a mountain fortress for himself using wall of stone, given enough time, simply because he got two spells for free. The fighter gets nothing for free. Indeed, strip a fighter, and you have nothing, while a wizard stripped can still use read magic at a minimum. The fighter has to purchase everything, whereas a smart wizard can make pretty much anything from nothing. At 11th, a wizard breaks the WBL with Wall of Iron, letting him pretty much do whatever he wants.

Note that I am merely using Wizard and Fighter as the "standard" magical and melee classes. It pretty much applies across the board.

Er, strip a Wizard of his spellbook and he is less than a Fighter stripped of everything. The Fighter can still punch people. But your example works perfectly well for spellcaster that don't store their reality altering powers in easily stolen books.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-29, 04:10 PM
The free spells per level is a problem, especially if WBL is strictly adhered to. As I said before, at 9th level, and without spending a single gold, a wizard can make a mountain fortress for himself using wall of stone, given enough time, simply because he got two spells for free. The fighter gets nothing for free. Indeed, strip a fighter, and you have nothing, while a wizard stripped can still use read magic at a minimum. The fighter has to purchase everything, whereas a smart wizard can make pretty much anything from nothing. At 11th, a wizard breaks the WBL with Wall of Iron, letting him pretty much do whatever he wants.

Note that I am merely using Wizard and Fighter as the "standard" magical and melee classes. It pretty much applies across the board.

At the rate this would take, a fighter could start with a mountain and turn it into a fortress. Per SBG, underground walls made of stone = free for the first level underground. Well, ok, he might need to make a bunch of craft checks to make it actually practical, but fabricate requires craft checks to make anything beyond crude junk too, and wall of stone creates just that. A wall of stone. The ability to make lots of rock is hardly the most powerful ability of a wizard.

Beorn080
2010-01-29, 04:16 PM
There is a feat that lets you prepare spells without a spellbook as a wizard, and I think it counts as a wizard feat for those nifty bonus feats. A quick grab of that for Magic Missile, Summon Monster I, and Charm person, and suddenly that wizard still looks nasty without anything, since he'll fill all those higher spell slots with metamagiced first level spells, whereas even with Improved Unarmed Strike, a fighter still won't be able to do much.

Edit: The fighter still has to start with the mountain. He can't make his own, while the wizard can drop it anywhere he wants.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 04:17 PM
Right. Remember that copying off a scroll burns it.

Also, the most powerful wizards are those with the most spells(as a general rule of thumb...exceptions like killer gnomes exist). So, an overall price increase hurts the most powerful wizards the most.



I would avoid an xp cost, as it penalizes only non-optimizers. Casters tend to lag a bit behind party level anyhow, due to item creation and spells that require xp, so spending more really....doesn't matter at all. The most this will do is add bookkeeping and discourage inexperienced wizards from stocking up on spells.

I prefer solutions that try to mitigate overall power disparity, including between optimizers and non-optimizers, since, IMO, balance between casters and melee is only one part of the balance issue.

Here follows my opinion on the matter, which to my utter befuddlement has generally been perceived negatively: reducing how many spells a spellcaster has access to, or else making those spells more costly, does nothing to balance spellcasters. It terribly hurts those who don't optimize, indeed most players I've met in real life (as opposed to boards like this or the WotC boards) tend to make blasty wizards and healbot clerics. Those options are rather underpowered, but playable so long as nobody in the group is optimizing. Even then Wizards and Fighters aren't completely balanced, although the issue there is versatility not power, whereas optimized a Wizard is both more versatile and more powerful, when not optimized Wizards and Fighters are similar in terms of power. As for those who do optimize, it hurts them only slightly, I mean it only takes two spells to perform Mind Rape/Love's Pain, how will a little gp loss make that any more balanced? Polymorph is only a single spell, even if you have to buy the darn scroll your one spell makes you more powerful than a Fighter! That doesn't even touch on spellcasting classes that also have broken special abilities (I'm looking at you Druid). In short, making spells more expensive does absolutely nothing to help anyone.

There is a feat that lets you prepare spells without a spellbook as a wizard, and I think it counts as a wizard feat for those nifty bonus feats. A quick grab of that for Magic Missile, Summon Monster I, and Charm person, and suddenly that wizard still looks nasty without anything, since he'll fill all those higher spell slots with metamagiced first level spells, whereas even with Improved Unarmed Strike, a fighter still won't be able to do much.
It does count as a Wizard bonus feat, I believe it is called spell mastery or something, though I have never actually purchased that feat. Even if the DM forbade spellbooks for some god awful reason if you just took that feat every chance you got you would still be overpowerd, though in this case you would fall way behind CoDZilla.
Edit: It is called spell mastery, and it doesn't work like I thought it did. You can only use it to gain spells already in your spellbook. Seriously, the Wizard's built in reliance on that thing is his only weakness. Although the part of the description where you gain 2 free spells every level makes it sound like the Wizard having a spellbook is some kind of physical constant, like it is inconceivable he could have leveled up and not be in possession of one.

Oslecamo
2010-01-29, 04:25 PM
whereas a smart wizard player can make pretty much anything from nothing.


Please. If the DM actually allows munchkin loops (like there being merchants witn infinite gold to buy all your walls of iron), then you can perfectly make infinite gold loops with any class(cough broken stairs cough), and go to town from there. Wizards being the only dudes who can benefit from infinite preparation time in a world that doesn't react to them is a gross lie.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 04:30 PM
Please. If the DM actually allows munchkin loops (like there being merchants witn infinite gold to buy all your walls of iron), then you can perfectly make infinite gold loops with any class(cough broken stairs cough), and go to town from there. Wizards being the only dudes who can benefit from infinite preparation time in a world that doesn't react to them is a gross lie.

The preparation time issue is a big one. Wizards are far less powerful in actual gameplay than in theoretical optimization (although they are still broken). The biggest issue is versatility, spellcasters have far more options than nonspellcasters on any given adventuring day. Wizards that are actually more powerful than Fighters, as opposed to simply more versatile, are usually the result of serious min/maxing.

Sinfire Titan
2010-01-29, 04:34 PM
Please. If the DM actually allows munchkin loops (like there being merchants witn infinite gold to buy all your walls of iron), then you can perfectly make infinite gold loops with any class(cough broken stairs cough), and go to town from there. Wizards being the only dudes who can benefit from infinite preparation time in a world that doesn't react to them is a gross lie.

He doesn't even need an infinite loop to do things with his spells. Wall of Iron produces enough iron to create an Iron Golem, or you can PaO it into Adamantine, or another metal.

They can turn their XP into WBL, and then turn that into raw power (thus the circle renews itself). Seriously, it isn't that hard to figure out.


Items are needed to make encounters easier.
XP is needed to craft items.
Encounters grant XP.
I'm a Wizard, and thus capable of ravaging the laws of physics by blinking.


If all of the above are true, your players have just set up an infinite loop that only two things can end:


TPK.
DM Fiat


One of those is highly unlikely, and the other one is heavy-handed.

Oslecamo
2010-01-29, 04:41 PM
He doesn't even need an infinite loop to do things with his spells. Wall of Iron produces enough iron to create an Iron Golem, or you can PaO it into Adamantine, or another metal.

Eerr, you cannot use PaO to create special and/or valuable materials... It says so in the description.



They can turn their XP into WBL, and then turn that into raw power (thus the circle renews itself). Seriously, it isn't that hard to figure out.


Items are needed to make encounters easier.
XP is needed to craft items.
Encounters grant XP.
I'm a Wizard, and thus capable of ravaging the laws of physics by blinking.


If all of the above are true, your players have just set up an infinite loop that only two things can end:


Got a better list for you:
1-Items are needed to make ecounters easier.
2-Items drop from ecounters. And stealing houses. And uber diplomacy. And...
3-I'm an adventurer, so I can defeat enemies/talk/steal.
4-While the wizard is burning his own soul, I go out there and loot/steal/talk, geting items while keeping my exp.

So yeah, crafting magic items is just one of many ways of geting nice stuff.:smallcool:

Or what? Are you playing a computer game where all enemies are tied to your level, regardless of your actual power? :smallwink:

It's the DM's duty to challenge the players. Last time I checked, leting the party get away with everything they do isn't exactly challenging.

Beorn080
2010-01-29, 04:46 PM
Crafting magic items is the ONLY way to get nice stuff, its just how many removes it is from the player. That +5 flaming vorpal keen Longsword didn't just appear in the goblins possession, someone had to make it. Thus, we once again come back to wizards. Also, if looted items are strictly random, then the wizard still has the advantage with the ability to craft exactly what he wants, as opposed to the greatsword focused fighter who just got three wands.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 04:48 PM
Crafting magic items is the ONLY way to get nice stuff, its just how many removes it is from the player. That +5 flaming vorpal keen Longsword didn't just appear in the goblins possession, someone had to make it. Thus, we once again come back to wizards. Also, if looted items are strictly random, then the wizard still has the advantage with the ability to craft exactly what he wants, as opposed to the greatsword focused fighter who just got three wands.

That's no problem, he'll just use UMD... damn you cross class skill system!

Oslecamo
2010-01-29, 04:53 PM
Crafting magic items is the ONLY way to get nice stuff, its just how many removes it is from the player. That +5 flaming vorpal keen Longsword didn't just appear in the goblins possession, someone had to make it. Thus, we once again come back to wizards.
Not really. Between deities creating items and handing them to their minions and the ocasional pact with an outsider, there's several other magic item sources.

Also, if the goblin tribe has a wizard capable of crafting said +5 flaming vorpal keen longsword, then you certainly don't have time to waste crafting, because you're facing an epic BBEG that will not be exactly happy when you're looting his minions.:smalltongue:


Also, if looted items are strictly random, then the wizard still has the advantage with the ability to craft exactly what he wants, as opposed to the greatsword focused fighter who just got three wands.

Then the fighter sells the wands on the same market where the wizard stocks up on scrolls and buys crafting materials, and buys himself a new shiny longsword.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 05:00 PM
Then the fighter sells the wands on the same market where the wizard stocks up on scrolls and buys crafting materials, and buys himself a new shiny longsword.

Assuming the game world has markets where you can buy high level magic items, such as +5 vorpal longswords. Though really, the DM should be handing out treasure suitable for the party in the adventures. If the Dragon's hoard doesn't seem to consist of oddly convenient equipment for your character's, the DM's not doing his job.

Beorn080
2010-01-29, 05:02 PM
Exactly, which is why I said that at a minimum, to help balance the fun* of classes, I said everyone should get UMD as a class skill. Even if we just assume that no one crafts, there are magic items that you get as loot that only casters and UMD users can use, mostly scrolls and wands. A +5 longsword is still a +5 longsword no matter who is swinging it, yet a Staff of the Magi is just a backscratcher to a fighter.

Oslecamo
2010-01-29, 05:15 PM
Exactly, which is why I said that at a minimum, to help balance the fun* of classes, I said everyone should get UMD as a class skill. Even if we just assume that no one crafts, there are magic items that you get as loot that only casters and UMD users can use, mostly scrolls and wands.
I have yet to see a wizard run around in fullplate, but meh, even as a cross class skill, some UMD ranks+a couple of skill boosters will allow you to reliably activate magic items at mid-high levels. Wich will definentely be more effecient than the wizard swinging the +5 vorpal sword.



A +5 longsword is still a +5 longsword no matter who is swinging it, yet a Staff of the Magi is just a backscratcher to a fighter.
A backscratcher that gives him SR, can absorb enemy spells and can be sacrificed for a last-ditch attack. Not bad, not bad at all!


Drolyt:Since there's some massive industry wich can quickly absorb tons of iron to feed the wizards maniac plans, clearly we're talking about a very capitalist setting wich will gladly get or buy anything if you've got enough gold.:smalltongue:

But yeah, the DM should be customizing the loot to the party now and then, not just throwing barrels of random stuff.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 05:22 PM
Drolyt:Since there's some massive industry wich can quickly absorb tons of iron to feed the wizards maniac plans, clearly we're talking about a very capitalist setting wich will gladly get or buy anything if you've got enough gold.:smalltongue:

I never agreed with that plan. It falls victim to the same issues as the ten foot pole/ten foot ladder trick: who's buying all these poles? An infinite money trick that relies on the DM failing economics forever doesn't work, regardless of whether RAW suports it (and it's contentious whether it does). A lot of Wizard "tricks" don't really work. The ones that do are plenty powerful though.

Lycanthromancer
2010-01-29, 05:32 PM
I prefer using the creation spells to fuel my own industrious nature. Use wall of stone, wall of iron, and fabricate to build my own fortress, using illusion spells to cover up for my piddly little +30 or so to Craft checks (without ranks).

That, or for building golems and such.

Or I could easily fabricate my walls into useful everyday items that any and everyone needs (such as nails, knives, flatware, horseshoes, and flying spheres o' planet-destroying death).

Very affordable, and I'd even take livestock, rather than gold, if you have it. (That's what flesh to salt is for, after all.)

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 05:33 PM
I prefer using the creation spells to fuel my own industrious nature. Use wall of stone, wall of iron, and fabricate to build my own fortress, using illusion spells to cover up for my piddly little +30 or so to Craft checks (without ranks).

That, or for building golems and such.

Or I could easily fabricate my walls into useful everyday items that any and everyone needs (such as nails, knives, flatware, horseshoes, and flying spheres o' planet-destroying death).

Very affordable, and I'd even take livestock, rather than gold, if you have it. (That's what flesh to salt is for, after all.)

Still fails economics forever. Specifically, supply and demand.

Lycanthromancer
2010-01-29, 05:36 PM
Still fails economics forever. Specifically, supply and demand.How so? I supply something that is always in demand, and they need it. I can produce such things far more cheaply, and thus can outbid all of the rubes that dare to do smithing Ye Olde Fashionede Waye.tm

Tyndmyr
2010-01-29, 05:38 PM
Eerr, you cannot use PaO to create special and/or valuable materials... It says so in the description.

Right. You can sell the iron, of course...to an extent. You then have to deal with the logistics of selling the iron, especially to people who don't happen to want the iron in wall sized sheets.

It's a source of potential gold, sure, but the theoretical "OMG, infinite gold" is just as ridiculous as the "I craft every day for the next 15 years. I make the difference between the craft price and half market price" is. Both theoretically result in giant piles of gold, but only if you ignore the rest of the world and rules, like, yknow, paying for room and board while crafting/blowing spells during downtime, and transporting your goods to market.

Oslecamo
2010-01-29, 05:38 PM
I never agreed with that plan. It falls victim to the same issues as the ten foot pole/ten foot ladder trick: who's buying all these poles? An infinite money trick that relies on the DM failing economics forever doesn't work, regardless of whether RAW suports it (and it's contentious whether it does). A lot of Wizard "tricks" don't really work. The ones that do are plenty powerful though.

Say hello to the diplomancer/bluffmancer. And any wizard trick can be stoped if the DM is rational enough. In core only, there's really nothing out of control you can do if there aren't crazy economics. Because the remaining core combos are all based on the efreeti having wish as a SLA. But it actualy doesn't. It's not italized like all other SLAs in all other books, and it doesn't refer to the wish spell, it's "grant up to three wishes". So what the ability actualy does is completely up to the DM.

Sure you could go around on a charm/dominating spree, but a diplomancer/bluffmancer could do so as well.

Outside of core there's some nastier stuff like genesis, but again, the DM being rational and ruling the blank parts of the spell will solve it.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 05:44 PM
Say hello to the diplomancer/bluffmancer. And any wizard trick can be stoped if the DM is rational enough. In core only, there's really nothing out of control you can do if there aren't crazy economics. Because the remaining core combos are all based on the efreeti having wish as a SLA. But it actualy doesn't. It's not italized like all other SLAs in all other books, and it doesn't refer to the wish spell, it's "grant up to three wishes". So what the ability actualy does is completely up to the DM.

Sure you could go around on a charm/dominating spree, but a diplomancer/bluffmancer could do so as well.

Outside of core there's some nastier stuff like genesis, but again, the DM being rational and ruling the blank parts of the spell will solve it.

For the most part, but Polymorph is plenty broken in core. Diplomacy, as written, is a horrible horrible skill that should never be used in any game (not because it isn't good, but because the way it works is both ridiculous and abusable). There's also the fact that even in core wizards/clerics can gain immunity to almost anything, and wizards can fly under their own power, which almost no one else can. Add to that brokeness like grease, empowered ennervation, etc., and really wizards are already broken in core, just nowhere near as much.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-29, 05:48 PM
Here follows my opinion on the matter, which to my utter befuddlement has generally been perceived negatively: reducing how many spells a spellcaster has access to, or else making those spells more costly, does nothing to balance spellcasters. It terribly hurts those who don't optimize, indeed most players I've met in real life (as opposed to boards like this or the WotC boards) tend to make blasty wizards and healbot clerics. Those options are rather underpowered, but playable so long as nobody in the group is optimizing. Even then Wizards and Fighters aren't completely balanced, although the issue there is versatility not power, whereas optimized a Wizard is both more versatile and more powerful, when not optimized Wizards and Fighters are similar in terms of power. As for those who do optimize, it hurts them only slightly, I mean it only takes two spells to perform Mind Rape/Love's Pain, how will a little gp loss make that any more balanced? Polymorph is only a single spell, even if you have to buy the darn scroll your one spell makes you more powerful than a Fighter! That doesn't even touch on spellcasting classes that also have broken special abilities (I'm looking at you Druid). In short, making spells more expensive does absolutely nothing to help anyone.

It lowers the WBL available to spend elsewhere. WBL is a goodly portion of high level power. At low level, it's not so significant, but the only reason the fighter 20 vs wizard 13 duel gave the fighter any chance was the increased WBL...which made a huge difference.

Yes, wizards are still ridiculously powerful, but we can presume that infinite combos will not be allowed. Otherwise, the entire discussion post pun-pun is futile.



Edit: It is called spell mastery, and it doesn't work like I thought it did. You can only use it to gain spells already in your spellbook. Seriously, the Wizard's built in reliance on that thing is his only weakness. Although the part of the description where you gain 2 free spells every level makes it sound like the Wizard having a spellbook is some kind of physical constant, like it is inconceivable he could have leveled up and not be in possession of one.

Collegiate Wizard gives you double spells known per level up. It's handy, and does serve to counter the prices of spells being raised ridiculously high, as this feat would simply become more or less mandatory then. So, you are inherently limited in how much balancing you can do by the price/availability of spells unless the DM really wants to take the train to fiatville.

Beorn080
2010-01-29, 05:52 PM
Alright, I think this got off track, partly my fault I admit.

To go back to my removal of free spells and following strict WBL adjustments, let me give an example. Note that all numbers are being made up for simplicities sake.

According to normal rules, a level 20 wizard has 40 spells for free, plus a total wealth of 200,000 gold. The same fighter also has 200,000 gold worth of magical toys, but no spells. Thus, no matter what the fighter tries, he can't match the versatility of a wizard due to the wizard having 40 spells in addition to his 200k worth of mechanical magic.

Now, if every spell cost 1000 gold, these being the spells you gain on level up, that wizard will have spent 40k out of his 200k WBL. Thus, the fighter would have 40k more magical trinkets then the wizard, which doesn't balance things, but would help the fighter from feeling so left out as the wizard suddenly starts flying around and dropping meteors on everyone. The fighter would be able to pick up some extra trinkets compared to the wizard, while the wizard still has the spells.

Please remember that all numbers were made up on the spot, and these numbers are neither balanced nor factual, merely representory of the idea.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 05:53 PM
It lowers the WBL available to spend elsewhere. WBL is a goodly portion of high level power. At low level, it's not so significant, but the only reason the fighter 20 vs wizard 13 duel gave the fighter any chance was the increased WBL...which made a huge difference.

Yes, wizards are still ridiculously powerful, but we can presume that infinite combos will not be allowed. Otherwise, the entire discussion post pun-pun is futile.



Collegiate Wizard gives you double spells known per level up. It's handy, and does serve to counter the prices of spells being raised ridiculously high, as this feat would simply become more or less mandatory then. So, you are inherently limited in how much balancing you can do by the price/availability of spells unless the DM really wants to take the train to fiatville.

I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing this "WBL is a big portion of your power" thing. It might be true for fighters, but almost anything a magic item can do a spell can do better. The only items I ever find that terribly useful on a wizard are: defensive buffs, metamagic rods, and ability enhancers. Seriously, many wizards, especially low level ones, will use wands and scrolls, but beyond this low WBL doesn't hurt them.

Sinfire Titan
2010-01-29, 05:54 PM
Drolyt:Since there's some massive industry wich can quickly absorb tons of iron to feed the wizards maniac plans, clearly we're talking about a very capitalist setting wich will gladly get or buy anything if you've got enough gold.:smalltongue:

One word: Sigil. They import building materials, and you can sell that Iron cheap to some construction workers there.

Zaydos
2010-01-29, 05:56 PM
People always point to polymorph being broken... what I don't get is that honestly it's better to use it on your fighter or barbarian friend than yourself (or monk, or if ToB is allowed Unarmed Swordsage or Warblade). Especially if your DM uses the rule that not having a throat that can articulate sounds or hands makes it so you can't use spells requiring verbal or somatic components respectively. A character polymorphed into a hydra with bad BAB is... well ultimately rather unimpressive. Maybe with a full ton of buffs behind it, but Core forms not so much (MMIII Cave Troll is nice though, humanoid so you get all your items and casting, plus average damage on a charge is higher than a 9 headed hydra's standard attack).

Now Shapechange is totally broken, as is Draconic Polymorph (shared with your familiar especially).

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 05:57 PM
One word: Sigil. They import building materials, and you can sell that Iron cheap to some construction workers there.

Cause obviously no one in Sigil can cast Wall of Iron. Seriously, if that worked than your pc wouldn't be the only one doing it. The world would be devoid of iron mines, and iron would be cheaper than dirt.

Edit:

People always point to polymorph being broken... what I don't get is that honestly it's better to use it on your fighter or barbarian friend than yourself (or monk, or if ToB is allowed Unarmed Swordsage or Warblade). Especially if your DM uses the rule that not having a throat that can articulate sounds or hands makes it so you can't use spells requiring verbal or somatic components respectively. A character polymorphed into a hydra with bad BAB is... well ultimately rather unimpressive. Maybe with a full ton of buffs behind it, but Core forms not so much (MMIII Cave Troll is nice though, humanoid so you get all your items and casting, plus average damage on a charge is higher than a 9 headed hydra's standard attack).

Now Shapechange is totally broken, as is Draconic Polymorph (shared with your familiar especially).
It is better to cast it on your party fighter, but part of the difficulty of D&D is that it was only designed for PvE balance (which it does poorly), not PvP balance (which doesn't exist at WotC). A polymorphed mage can often beat a fighter handily. Hands down once you get Tenser's Transformation.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-29, 06:03 PM
I'm sorry, but I'm not seeing this "WBL is a big portion of your power" thing. It might be true for fighters, but almost anything a magic item can do a spell can do better. The only items I ever find that terribly useful on a wizard are: defensive buffs, metamagic rods, and ability enhancers. Seriously, many wizards, especially low level ones, will use wands and scrolls, but beyond this low WBL doesn't hurt them.

Yes, low WBL does affect wizards less than casters. It does still affect them, though.

Ability boosters, for example. Your wizard is going to want +6s to dex, con and int. The others are pretty negotiable, and not terribly important, but at 36k a pop, he'll spend over half his WBL just maxing out stat boosters, if he decides to go that route.

A level 20 wizard will probably not wish to limit himself to the freebie spells, either. He'll probably have picked up other ones over time. The cheapest way of doing this is a Blessed Book, at half price(doesn't cover cost of getting access to spells or burning scrolls), for 12,500. Filling that by the cheapest method, paying casters to copy off spellbooks, costs an addition what, 5,000 Gp? Relying on scrolls(and not having a blessed book) would result in the total cost for a comparable investment being roughly twice as much.

Optimystik
2010-01-29, 06:03 PM
Cause obviously no one in Sigil can cast Wall of Iron. Seriously, if that worked than your pc wouldn't be the only one doing it. The world would be devoid of iron mines, and iron would be cheaper than dirt.

It is, e.g. on the Plane of Earth. Unfortunately, demand is also high, because several creatures eat it (in very large quantities.)

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 06:05 PM
Yes, low WBL does affect wizards less than casters. It does still affect them, though.

Ability boosters, for example. Your wizard is going to want +6s to dex, con and int. The others are pretty negotiable, and not terribly important, but at 36k a pop, he'll spend over half his WBL just maxing out stat boosters, if he decides to go that route.

A level 20 wizard will probably not wish to limit himself to the freebie spells, either. He'll probably have picked up other ones over time. The cheapest way of doing this is a Blessed Book, at half price(doesn't cover cost of getting access to spells or burning scrolls), for 12,500. Filling that by the cheapest method, paying casters to copy off spellbooks, costs an addition what, 5,000 Gp? Relying on scrolls(and not having a blessed book) would result in the total cost for a comparable investment being roughly twice as much.

That's nice. You've managed to make Wizards less fun and Fighters still aren't competitive. If anyone cared about those gp costs they would just learn less spells.

elonin
2010-01-29, 06:06 PM
Please. If the DM actually allows munchkin loops (like there being merchants witn infinite gold to buy all your walls of iron), then you can perfectly make infinite gold loops with any class(cough broken stairs cough), and go to town from there. Wizards being the only dudes who can benefit from infinite preparation time in a world that doesn't react to them is a gross lie.

If I were dm'ing I wouldn't give much trouble on selling the wall of iron. You do have to transport the thing which isn't impossible but also not inconsequential. Also, unless your character is the only wizard its been done before and thus the price of iron not going to be that high. The prices of iron/steel based items are based on the crafting not the material especially if someone has been dumping iron on the market. For this reason the wizard would be better off having ranks in crafting then make his wall of iron/steel then use fabricate to make a finished item. This though gets into another issue which has bugged me for awhile. Many games don't make an issue at all of being able to dump a large amount of gear esp weapons when the weapon sellers have weapons of their own that they want to sell.

Was also thinking about the A>B class fallacy. For example, while playing in a LARP it was easy to find that many pc deaths happened by people from another faction coming into camp unannounced killing a few of us and slinking off. This was in a vigilant camp. Also, I managed to upset the whole camp because they wanted me to tend to a prisoner that they intended to question. I managed to hit the prisoner 5 times killing him before the rest of the camp could react, not that I was particularly quick or powerful. Yes I was trusted but even as someone who wasn't trusted I managed to hurt one of the party members (playing an npc role) by offering healing but instead casting an evil spell on him. It's really easy to sit around a table playing collaboratively, but that's not the way it happens if you only know what your character knows.

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 06:10 PM
If I were dm'ing I wouldn't give much trouble on selling the wall of iron. You do have to transport the thing which isn't impossible but also not inconsequential. Also, unless your character is the only wizard its been done before and thus the price of iron not going to be that high. The prices of iron/steel based items are based on the crafting not the material especially if someone has been dumping iron on the market. For this reason the wizard would be better off having ranks in crafting then make his wall of iron/steel then use fabricate to make a finished item. This though gets into another issue which has bugged me for awhile. Many games don't make an issue at all of being able to dump a large amount of gear esp weapons when the weapon sellers have weapons of their own that they want to sell.

Was also thinking about the A>B class fallacy. For example, while playing in a LARP it was easy to find that many pc deaths happened by people from another faction coming into camp unannounced killing a few of us and slinking off. This was in a vigilant camp. Also, I managed to upset the whole camp because they wanted me to tend to a prisoner that they intended to question. I managed to hit the prisoner 5 times killing him before the rest of the camp could react, not that I was particularly quick or powerful. Yes I was trusted but even as someone who wasn't trusted I managed to hurt one of the party members (playing an npc role) by offering healing but instead casting an evil spell on him. It's really easy to sit around a table playing collaboratively, but that's not the way it happens if you only know what your character knows.

Uh, could you clarify your example? I don't get what it has to do with an A>B class fallacy, and I can only guess what an A>B class fallacy is.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-29, 06:12 PM
That's nice. You've managed to make Wizards less fun and Fighters still aren't competitive. If anyone cared about those gp costs they would just learn less spells.

How does paying for your spells make wizards less fun? It's a very minor, flexible impediment, vastly less problematic than banning spells en masse like some recommend.

There are no simple fixes to make fighters equal to wizards. Any sufficiently powerful fix would make one class no longer play like it used to in any means. Thus, changes that are subtle enough to make in-play differences less dramatic are sufficient. Or, we end up playing a different game entirely.

Tyndmyr
2010-01-29, 06:14 PM
This though gets into another issue which has bugged me for awhile. Many games don't make an issue at all of being able to dump a large amount of gear esp weapons when the weapon sellers have weapons of their own that they want to sell.

The DMG does have limits as to how much crap you can foist off on a tiny town, right with the bit that lists the most expensive magic items available in each town.

Both are occasionally ignored, either on the path to mass power for all, or as an example of "look how unrealistic D&D is".

MichielHagen
2010-01-29, 06:23 PM
Was also thinking about the A>B class fallacy. For example, while playing in a LARP it was easy to find that many pc deaths happened by people from another faction coming into camp unannounced killing a few of us and slinking off. This was in a vigilant camp. Also, I managed to upset the whole camp because they wanted me to tend to a prisoner that they intended to question. I managed to hit the prisoner 5 times killing him before the rest of the camp could react, not that I was particularly quick or powerful. Yes I was trusted but even as someone who wasn't trusted I managed to hurt one of the party members (playing an npc role) by offering healing but instead casting an evil spell on him. It's really easy to sit around a table playing collaboratively, but that's not the way it happens if you only know what your character knows.


Maybe its getting too late here, but i have no idea what your point is...

elonin
2010-01-29, 06:30 PM
My comment about A>B was wizard better than fighter. The fallacy is that a fighter can't take down a wizard. A wizard who is out of spells, unaware, or asleep is an easy target. This may be less true when the wizard is ready for something but I've been surprised during LARP at the things that could happen. That is what the examples in the previous post were talking about. Another example is something that I saw happen.

player 1: casts damaging touch spell
player 2: Hey wait
player 1: huh what?
player 2: grabs player 1's hands and pushes them to his head
player 1: stares dumbfounded
player 2: What spell was that in your hands?
player 1: <look of realization> falls over being knocked out by own spell

Drolyt
2010-01-29, 06:31 PM
The DMG does have limits as to how much crap you can foist off on a tiny town, right with the bit that lists the most expensive magic items available in each town.

Both are occasionally ignored, either on the path to mass power for all, or as an example of "look how unrealistic D&D is".

Right. Lots of people ignore the rules when "optimizing". Of course the D&D designers shouldn't have expected such rules to be followed, and yet they seem to have incorporated them into their "balance" tests.

elonin
2010-01-29, 06:36 PM
Also meant to answer that point. The amount that I've seen dumped on a metro economy could have outfitted an army. Consider that the pc's are not the only adventurers bringing out gear. That is without the wall exploits. The bigger problem is that some creative use of spells assume that the pcs are the only ones who could do such things.