PDA

View Full Version : How to show my DM that 3.5 is more broken than he thinks without being a jerk?



Mystic Muse
2010-04-29, 12:17 AM
I have this DM. He's a great guy, and a real nice DM. However, he has no concept of power levels.I don't want to be a jerk about this. I just want him to know that he has to be more careful of what he asks players to do/what he allows. I also don't want to make him Paranoid about the effects of wizards or other fullcasting classes though. Is there any good way to do this? it'd be nice if it was also an easy way.

Posts saying "Play a wizard and break his campaign" will be disregarded. I don't want to get banned from the group. I just want the DM to be slightly more aware of exactly what he's allowing in the game.

would simply showing him the tier system work?

Prodan
2010-04-29, 12:19 AM
Ask someone to DM a challenging dungeoncrawl for the two of you. You play a Druid, he plays a Monk.

Temotei
2010-04-29, 12:21 AM
Show him this site. It enlightens. :smallcool:

Kylarra
2010-04-29, 12:25 AM
Is it becoming an issue in your campaign? I'm not seeing why this is necessary, to be honest.

Mystic Muse
2010-04-29, 12:27 AM
Is it becoming an issue in your campaign? I'm not seeing why this is necessary, to be honest.

It's going to become one if I do what he asks and make a Wizard cohort for my character to use. I'm not going to be a jerk but I'm a lot more of a powergamer than the rest of my group.

Kylarra
2010-04-29, 12:29 AM
It's going to become one if I do what he asks and make a Wizard cohort for my character to use.Why? Assuming you know the power level of the campaign, you can easily tweak your wizard to not overshadow people and still be moderately useful.



I'm not going to be a jerk but I'm a lot more of a powergamer than the rest of my group.Doesn't matter. I'm a lot more of an optimizer than the rest of my group. I'm also the ST of our current campaign. Just because I know the tricks and know how to get the best mileage out of every point doesn't mean I have to apply that knowledge to the detriment of the campaign.

Godskook
2010-04-29, 12:29 AM
It's going to become one if I do what he asks and make a Wizard cohort for my character to use.

Why?(No, seriously! It helps to know what the relevant background is.)

BobVosh
2010-04-29, 12:29 AM
It's going to become one if I do what he asks and make a Wizard cohort for my character to use.

Simply do it, and then eliminate the feat when he notices. If he doesn't notice than don't care. A batman wizard makes the party look good anyway.

senrath
2010-04-29, 12:29 AM
Just show him some TO threads. If you show him what some of them can come up with, hopefully he'll realize how broken 3.5 can be.

Mystic Muse
2010-04-29, 12:31 AM
Why? Assuming you know the power level of the campaign, you can easily tweak your wizard to not overshadow people and still be moderately useful.

That's the problem. I don't know the power level of the campaign. There's always at least one player missing, I have no clue what the druid is going to do, I can't see the Monk's stats and I can't see the Spellthief's either.

I can't make a well balanced wizard because I have absolutely nothing to gauge her against.

The showing the DM that the game is unbalanced though is so that in the future he can help the lower power classes/characters and ask the guys with the high power classes/characters to tone it down.

Kylarra
2010-04-29, 12:32 AM
That's the problem. I don't know the power level of the campaign. There's always at least one player missing, I have no clue what the druid is going to do, I can't see the Monk's stats and I can't see the Spellthief's either.

I can't make a well balanced wizard because I have absolutely nothing to gauge her against.You don't need to see their character sheets to judge overall effectiveness... if all else fails, just make a straight wizard (not spec) buffer. It'll take exactly zero spotlight and everyone will be happy.

Ravens_cry
2010-04-29, 12:34 AM
Is it becoming an issue in your campaign? I'm not seeing why this is necessary, to be honest.
I agree. While potentialities are diverse, I have yet to see a campaign personally that went that way.
The most broken character I ever saw was a fighter.
So unless it is actually a problem, where one character is making the game not fun for others, I don't see why it needs to be brought up.

Mystic Muse
2010-04-29, 12:36 AM
You don't need to see their character sheets to judge overall effectiveness... if all else fails, just make a straight wizard (not spec) buffer. It'll take exactly zero spotlight and everyone will be happy.

This isn't really an option for me. I find pure support characters to be boring.

Kylarra
2010-04-29, 12:39 AM
This isn't really an option for me. I find pure support characters to be boring.It's not your character. It's a cohort. Your cohort should not be "your character mk II". If you find it boring, then that's fine. It means you're less likely to try to take the spotlight with them.

If you really can't restrain yourself and can't see yourself not ending his campaign with your wizard, tell him:

a) "please don't give me a wizard cohort"
or, if for some reason the wizard needs to be around,
b)"please make and run the wizard cohort like a NPC"

Draz74
2010-04-29, 12:40 AM
Design a really optimized character (or several), and give it to the DM to use as a BBEG?

Warning: this method may convince the DM, but it also may lead to a TPK.

Koury
2010-04-29, 12:41 AM
It's not your character. It's a cohort. Your cohort should not be "your character mk II".

+1

I'm not sure what the deal is. You've never in your whole life been capable of not breaking a campaign while playing a Wizard?

gdiddy
2010-04-29, 12:43 AM
So you'll break the game if you don't show him how fragile it is so he can create arbitrary rules to keep you from breaking it? Gotcha.

Pluto
2010-04-29, 12:43 AM
I can't make a well balanced wizard because I have absolutely nothing to gauge her against.

Sure you can. Just spend spell slots on things like Enlarge, Grease, Haste, Slow, Glitterdust -- things that let the other party members win the fight.




If you want to make a point or something, point at a focused summoner's Planar Binding: both the ways a Wizard can ensure a victory in the Charisma checks and the way Outsiders compare to your fellow party members.

This is the closest thing to a direct comparison of What Wizards can do to What Other chumps can do.

Then point out Rope Trick and the way that it negates the Wizard's primary weakness.

PhoenixRivers
2010-04-29, 12:48 AM
Easiest way:

Set him aside. Ask him to humor you, and think up a challenge at ECL 10.

Build a level 8 druid, and a level 8 wizard. Ask him to run the ECL 10 challenge. Crush it.

Point out the other ways you could have done it.

Note: If he is an informed DM that is aware of class balance, you'll lose. If this is the case, then trust the DM's judgement on how he can handle powerclasses in game.

Mystic Muse
2010-04-29, 12:50 AM
+

I'm not sure what the deal is. You've never in your whole life been capable of not breaking a campaign while playing a Wizard?

Actually I've never in my whole life played a wizard.

Never mind. I'll just tell him I don't think I can make a wizard Cohort I find interesting without breaking her yet.

I'd just rather he knew ahead of time that 3.5 isn't as balanced as he thinks it is rather than me breaking his campaign with a character he finds overpowered again.

I have to go to bed now. I'll answer any other questions tomorrow.

TheThan
2010-04-29, 01:00 AM
Yeah, its not necessarily necessary. Depending on the sort of players your DM as around his table.

The obvious situation is to purposefully break his game. Just play a druid and show him how at level five you can turn into like ten wolves and just chain trip/AOO an enemy to death.

Or pick up divine metamagic and show him how a cleric can buff up and be as powerful as the party fighter, with access to spells.


Or you can abuse scry and die tactics and own every encounter before the party gets to do anything. Use things like fly, Teleport, rope trick, dispel magic, stone shape, dismissal etc to defeat an encounter with a single spell.

But honestly, it doesn’t sound like you really need to break anything to have a good time in the game so I really wouldn’t worry too much about it.

Kylarra
2010-04-29, 01:06 AM
I'm gonna reiterate that a cohort isn't [necessarily] supposed to be fun for you to play or something that you [necessarily] find interesting, unlike "your" character. It's someone that follows you around out of loyalty, or generally because you forced them to by feat. You could easily just build the wizard and give it to your DM to play, or just have the DM build your cohort.

THIS SHOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM

There are lots of valid reasons and proper places to demonstrate why and how badly 3.X is broken. A wizard cohort in a game with no apparent power issues is neither a good reason, nor the place.

Godskook
2010-04-29, 01:14 AM
Actually I've never in my whole life played a wizard.

I think this is part of the problem. And since you don't like 'support' casters, why not an orbizard or gish? Both could be effective, but lack the potency that batman or 'god' do.

For an orbizard, go focused specialist conjurer, banning necromancy, transmutation, and abjuration(cutting out 3 really good secondary schools should tame the build). Focus on filling low-level slots with lesser orbs of x. Get searing spell or an equivalent, and don't reduce metamagic if you use it at all. Maximize intelligence, and focus on lobbing orbs of fire at the biggest threat your DM drops in the encounter. You should have a good shot at dazing it for a round, but with poor metamagic, its doubtful that you'd kill it. An interesting character that will help but not outshine anyone, but will always be helpful. Oh, and snag Knowledge Devotion to get better to-hit rolls on the touch attacks, too.

For a gish, you're really just a glorified fighter with more vulnerabilities to dispel. A bad yet flavorful gish would be Monk 1/Wizard X/Enlightened Fist 10. Intentionally don't get KFGenius or Carmedine, and suffer the MAD. Focus on spells that boost your ability to crack skulls and take names. Knowledge Devotion will again prove functional, as will GMWhallop. Don't persist Wraithstrike, as a means to additionally knock this concept down just one last peg.

And the great thing with either? You're still getting 9th level spells, so if you underoptimized the guy, you can fix most of it with gear and better spell selections as needed.

Uec
2010-04-29, 01:14 AM
Well, as others have said, it's not really necessary to do this.

But if you insist, the easiest way is to ask him to design, say two encounters that he would consider fair to throw against the entire party without chance for sleep between (to show him that it's not even necessary to go nova), lvl 10 is probably good for this - bring a single 'encounter appropriate'-level druid that you have designed as powerful as you're at all able to within the rules that he normally run games at.

Then proceed to tear up his two encounters.

That tends to quickly kill all illusions about 3.5 being balanced. And as a bonus thing, it doesn't affect the game directly, so you haven't broken the game.

absolmorph
2010-04-29, 01:19 AM
Honestly, to show one of my caster players how over-powered wizards and sorcerers are, I just pointed at a few blasty-type spells (Lightning Bolt, Fireball, etc.) and explained that yeah, the fighter swings a sword really great, but you can deal more damage straight out of the box with spells. Then, I explained Polymorph's possibilities. And Alter Self's possibilities. He caught on pretty quick.

Johel
2010-04-29, 02:22 AM
What level is your character ?
What level is your cohort ?

This might help to sort out tricks that, once explained to the DM, might make him think about readjusting things.

Also, +1 with Kylarra : you can build a cohort to be in support role only.

While not a real cohort, we had a NPC adept who followed our group for nearly a year. Her only purpose was to be a walking medkit, along with a moral watchdog (a NG clergy was our main employer and while they were cool about turning a blind eye on some of our methods, they still were NG and wouldn't accept us going anti-hero too much).
The NPC eventually became a romantic interest for the rogue. Since her goddess requiered her to be virgin, she quickly lost her usefulness and became a whiny weakling. We threw her at an ogre, much to the dismay of the rogue.

Ormur
2010-04-29, 04:47 AM
Your primary character is for role-playing and interesting mechanical options. The cohort is for your primary character's role-play and doing the mechanically boring things your party lacks (support/healbot/meatshield/whatever). You don't want the cohort to be interesting since then you're in effect doing twice as much than the other players. One fun character should be enough, the cohort should be closer to an NPC than a PC. If the primary character isn't fun enough then that's the problem.

If I made a wizard cohort I'd make him to fill up gaps in the group without making him effective enough to overshadow anyone. Maybe his primary role is teleporting the group between places or he's a diviner. Just pick the spells the party lacks and fill the rest with buffs and utility.

Kaiyanwang
2010-04-29, 05:04 AM
I'm gonna reiterate that a cohort isn't [necessarily] supposed to be fun for you to play or something that you [necessarily] find interesting, unlike "your" character. It's someone that follows you around out of loyalty, or generally because you forced them to by feat. You could easily just build the wizard and give it to your DM to play, or just have the DM build your cohort.

THIS SHOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM

There are lots of valid reasons and proper places to demonstrate why and how badly 3.X is broken. A wizard cohort in a game with no apparent power issues is neither a good reason, nor the place.

+1 to this.

Shpadoinkle
2010-04-29, 05:15 AM
I really don't undersand what the problems is here. If your DM had asked you to build a fighter, would you be saying something like "But I don't know what to do because I don't like the 2-handed weapon + Power Attack + Charge etc. combo!" ?

Just because uber-wizards are the kind most often discussed doesn't mean they're the ony kind of wizard in existance.

You have options. FAR more options than if you were making a fighter or pretty much any other class besides a cleric or druid.

But for some reason you're acting like you don't. Why? I genuinely don't get it.

Amphetryon
2010-04-29, 05:17 AM
First thing I notice: There's a Monk and a Spellthief in your party. Both of those are generally underwhelming choices from a powergaming perspective. That means the Wizard cohort may seem necessary to a DM who has been pulling punches to some degree based on the joy that is the CR system. Just throwing that out there.

Second thing to consider: Given the party composition that you've mentioned, an Abjurer 10/Master Specialist 3/Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil is a powerful character that shouldn't - normally - seem like it's rising from the Pacific to crush Tokyo. While exceptions exist, this would seem even more likely in the hands of a player who is somewhat inexperienced with Wizards, as you say you are.

Third thing: It's a game. The object is to have fun. The number of situations, where a player sets out to "teach the DM a lesson" about power in the game, that end well is vanishingly small.

warmachine
2010-04-29, 05:28 AM
During a quieter moment, bring out the character sheet of a full blown, 25 point buy, 12th level Divine Metamagic Persist Spell Cleric, complete with Nightsticks and spells from Spell Compendium, show its obscene weapon damage, flying, always on healing etc., explain how it works and exclaim how much fun it would be to play this. Like Pun Pun, such a character would never be played.

veovius
2010-04-29, 05:28 AM
While not a real cohort, we had a NPC adept who followed our group for nearly a year. Her only purpose was to be a walking medkit, along with a moral watchdog (a NG clergy was our main employer and while they were cool about turning a blind eye on some of our methods, they still were NG and wouldn't accept us going anti-hero too much).
The NPC eventually became a romantic interest for the rogue. Since her goddess requiered her to be virgin, she quickly lost her usefulness and became a whiny weakling. We threw her at an ogre, much to the dismay of the rogue.

LOL Win!!! :smallbiggrin:

Killer Angel
2010-04-29, 05:34 AM
Honestly, to show one of my caster players how over-powered wizards and sorcerers are, I just pointed at a few blasty-type spells (Lightning Bolt, Fireball, etc.) and explained that yeah, the fighter swings a sword really great, but you can deal more damage straight out of the box with spells.

Seriously?
Usually, a comparison between straight damage between casters and meleers, shows the opposite...


Then, I explained Polymorph's possibilities. And Alter Self's possibilities. He caught on pretty quick.

This works decisely better.

Greenish
2010-04-29, 05:39 AM
Seriously?
Usually, a comparison between straight damage between casters and meleers, shows the opposite...Depends on the definition of "straight out of the box", I guess.

Killer Angel
2010-04-29, 05:59 AM
Depends on the definition of "straight out of the box", I guess.

Yep, but one of the spells in question for the damage comparison, was lightning bolt. The other was fireball.
At 10th lev. means 35 damage (medium) on a failed save (and I would not bet on it). Is the wizard spending his round to do 17 dam?
Even an awful core fighter can do better.
If you begin to stack metamagic on the spell, well, we shoud consider a charger build, and so on...

Amphetryon
2010-04-29, 06:33 AM
Yep, but one of the spells in question for the damage comparison, was lightning bolt. The other was fireball.
At 10th lev. means 35 damage (medium) on a failed save (and I would not bet on it). Is the wizard spending his round to do 17 dam?
Even an awful core fighter can do better.
If you begin to stack metamagic on the spell, well, we shoud consider a charger build, and so on...
If the party typically faces piles of mooks, it can be presented, theoretically, as doing 17 or 35 damage X 18 NPCs, so 306 - 630 damage to the enemies, overall. Sure, none of the individuals take that damage, but for raw numbers, it sounds impressive enough.

Douglas
2010-04-29, 06:52 AM
Ask him what stats he thinks a level 18 party is typically going to have. Then show him Team Solars (from my sig).

Or educate him about Pun-pun, and Hulking Hurler, and Cancer Mage, and Nanobots, and Omniscificer, and 1d2 Crusader, and King of Smack, and every other classic overpowered build you can find.

hewhosaysfish
2010-04-29, 06:54 AM
Never mind. I'll just tell him I don't think I can make a wizard Cohort I find interesting without breaking her yet.

I'd just rather he knew ahead of time that 3.5 isn't as balanced as he thinks it is rather than me breaking his campaign with a character he finds overpowered again.
Emphasis mine.

Uh oh...

Have you got in trouble with this DM before for turning up with an overpowered character?

The way you come across, it seems like you know what you're talking about: which builds, spells, tactics, etc are brokenly powerful; which ones are brokenly weak; and which ones aren't too crazy.

THE LAST GROUP! PICK FROM THE LAST GROUP! The ones which aren't crazy-broken!

If you're worried you don't know how optimised the rest of the group will be, pick up a couple of tricks from further out on the spectrum (although not from the extremes) but only use them when it becomes clear what league the party is playing in. (That is to say, use the awesome stuff if the rest of the party is awesome. Use the sucky stuff if the rest of the party is teh suk. Do not use the awesome stuff in a sucky party in an effort to "compensate" for their failings.)
It's like darts versus javelin: the objective is to hit a small target as precisely as possible, not just to throw it as far as you can.

If you're worried you don't have the self-control to not PAO yourself into a gold wyrm at the first opportunity then don't take that spell. If you're worried you don't have the self-control to not take that spell then stand on one leg in front of a mirror, look yourself square in the eye and kick yourself in the butt.

Yes, there are crazy-powerful things in DnD (especially if your a wizard).
The solution here is to not use them.
Telling the DM "It's not my fault! Dungeons and Dragons made me do it!" while you're chain-gating solars and mind-raping them is not a solution.

Your DM will never buy it, unless perhaps he's made out of papier-mache. And not even the mind-control beams we employ here in the Playground will convince him to buy it.

Jayabalard
2010-04-29, 06:57 AM
Never mind. I'll just tell him I don't think I can make a wizard Cohort I find interesting without breaking her yet.I don't understand why your cohort needs to be interesting. Just make your character interesting, and have a boring cohort, and everyone wins. your cohort can buff everyone, make them look good, and not steal any spotlight.

Really, it sounds like you have a problem to work on, since you seem to be implying that you're the only one who's having problems breaking the game. If the DM's permissiveness works for the rest of the party then the responsibility falls on you to not break the game.

Mercenary Pen
2010-04-29, 07:09 AM
Dunno how well this will work, but build your Wizard cohort to be fairly overpowered. In particular, make certain he has access to the spells that most easily break wealth by level- then hand out the extra wealth generated by, for example, combining wall of iron with fabricate- to the underpowered players, and any time you're asked, claim this is to help them keep up with your power level.

Obviously, if you're doing this, you need to be overpowered enough with the rest of your spells to actually have a valid point but that shouldn't be hard. Eventually it'll be apparent enough that the only reason the monk and the spellthief are keeping up with everyone is because of the extra kit you're helping them buy, and then you can probably sit down and seriously discuss the issue.

2xMachina
2010-04-29, 07:30 AM
I don't know... I don't think this is a problem.

Yes, Pun Pun is broken, but is it important to show that to your DM as an example of brokenness? No. Cause it'll be banned/nerfed.

Same here. Sure, you can build an all powerful wizard, and wait for the ban/nerf hammer. Or you can build a buffer or hold back the power.

It is only a problem if the players aren't having fun. If there is no problem, don't go look for 1.

Indon
2010-04-29, 08:43 AM
I have this DM. He's a great guy, and a real nice DM. However, he has no concept of power levels.I don't want to be a jerk about this. I just want him to know that he has to be more careful of what he asks players to do/what he allows. I also don't want to make him Paranoid about the effects of wizards or other fullcasting classes though. Is there any good way to do this? it'd be nice if it was also an easy way.

Posts saying "Play a wizard and break his campaign" will be disregarded. I don't want to get banned from the group. I just want the DM to be slightly more aware of exactly what he's allowing in the game.

would simply showing him the tier system work?

Your challenge is a very difficult one.

The reason power levels exist in D&D is because the higher power levels can be played in the way you do not want to play them.

If you're playing responsably, the different power levels will not be obvious. If you play irresponsibly, then they will be, but then you'll be breaking the campaign because you're playing irresponsibly.

Your best bet may be some kind of theoretical scenario.

Roderick_BR
2010-04-29, 08:58 AM
Ask someone to DM a challenging dungeoncrawl for the two of you. You play a Druid, he plays a Monk.
This. Make a different game so you can show him in practice without having to mess with his game. Just a one-shot with some pre-made characters is enough.

Kylarra
2010-04-29, 09:21 AM
I still don't see why all these calls for breaking the game, theoretically or otherwise, are necessary. It hasn't been a problem before, except to you perhaps, and the character in question that's sparking the issue is effectively an NPC. By doing this you're effectively saying to the DM, "I don't want to be a jerk, but I know enough about the game to break your campaign in half, and I either don't know enough to stop myself from doing so, and don't care enough to try to learn; or don't care enough about your game to restrain myself in the first place. I also don't care enough to play nice with others even though I'm claiming that I don't want to be a jerk about this in my first sentence."

Gamers with your level of knowledge are actually quite scary in real games. You know just enough theoretical knowledge to be intrigued by gamebreaking, but don't have enough experience to gauge what's appropriate for the game you're in.

It's a freaking wizard cohort. This isn't your main character who needs to be doing nice, shiny, and awesome things. This isn't a random player who is putting together an incantrix because they're attracted by shinies. This isn't some weird combination of obscure feats being much more powerful than they ought to be. This is a DM who, for some reason or another, gave you a wizard cohort, trusted you with building it, and you can't find a way to not break the game? This disturbs me on so many levels.

Riffington
2010-04-29, 09:22 AM
I'd just rather he knew ahead of time that 3.5 isn't as balanced as he thinks it is rather than me breaking his campaign with a character he finds overpowered again.


Why do you present this as a dichotomy?
It is only because 3.5 isn't balanced that you could break a campaign with an overpowered character.
Therefore the fact that he thinks you had an overpowered character (possibly to the point of breaking the game) proves that he already knows 3.5 isn't balanced. So no need to prove it again.

Ehra
2010-04-29, 10:28 AM
If you have no self control over yourself then tell the DM to tell you "don't be a jerk." If you're worried about anyone else breaking the game then have him tell everyone "don't be jerks, guys." Problem solved.

For a more serious answer, just because a character has something doesn't mean you have to use it at its fullest power. Stat our your Wizard cohort however you feel like it. But don't pull any game breaking shenanigans unless it becomes clear your party needs the help. Or if it becomes clear that the rest of your party are power gaming too and you need to keep up.

After reading your posts, I think your question shouldn't be "how do I show my DM that the game is unbalanced" but should instead be "how do I learn to stop being such a showoff?"

Pluto
2010-04-29, 10:41 AM
There's one thing I just can't wrap my head around.

The Wizard, played to make the greatest use of its resources (which include people to stick things with sharp objects), is a support class.

The Wizard can destroy every encounter on his own with liberal use of Rays of Stupidity, Enervations, Save-or-die spells, summons, etc.

But that requires a whole lot more resources than just tossing out a Sleet Storm and a Haste at the beginning of combat and letting the other characters do their jobs.

So you don't have the self-restraint not to play a powerful character, but you don't actually want to play a powerful character. Looks like you're in quite the pickle.

absolmorph
2010-04-29, 01:46 PM
Seriously?
Usually, a comparison between straight damage between casters and meleers, shows the opposite...

Scorching ray. Three hits for 4d6 damage. Fireball hits a 20ft radius sphere for up to 10d6, or 15d6 with Delayed Fireball. Disintegrate deals up to 40d6, and may destroy the target. And it deals 5d6 on a save.
I said "straight out of the box", meaning not trying to be a Batman Wizard.
With just a single feat (Maximize Spell), I can make that 72 damage (36 on a save), 60 damage (30 on a save), 90 (45 on a save), 240 (30 on a save).
The fighter, on the other hand, is still swinging a sword that deals 1d8+Str+Power Attack. That tops him off at (8 + 12 + 20=) 40 damage.



This works decisely better.
Yes, it does.

Chen
2010-04-29, 01:56 PM
The fighter, on the other hand, is still swinging a sword that deals 1d8+Str+Power Attack. That tops him off at (8 + 12 + 20=) 40 damage.

Course thats per attack. And if you're powering for everything it'd be +40 not +20 assuming a 2 hander. And assuming you're not mounted and charging (straight out of the PHB) or whatnot. In terms of absolute straight damage out of the PHB you're probably about on par melee and caster. It just happens to be the only thing the melee can do and almost the worst thing the caster can do.

Ormagoden
2010-04-29, 02:45 PM
You could talk to your DM about it...

Thespianus
2010-04-29, 02:52 PM
This isn't really an option for me. I find pure support characters to be boring.

Then make a Wizard that's rarely involved in combat, aside from some crossbow or Wand of Magic Missile-sniping, and when things look bad, he sweeps in, going nova if necessary and saves the day. Then he returns to crossbowing.

Make him a PC controlled Deus Ex Machina (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_ex_machina)-character. Can be plenty of fun, and will really show your DM the level of brokenness that can be attained, without rubbing it in his face from the first round of the first fight.

VanBuren
2010-04-29, 02:53 PM
I think most of this, as someone already pointed out, is explained by the "I've never played a Wizard" part of his post. It's entirely possible that the OP--due to inexperience--isn't confident in his ability to play a useful Wizard without overshadowing the party. That a Monk and Spellthief are his barometers is merely compounding the problem.

kabof
2010-04-29, 02:56 PM
Your cohort could be an Adept. It may sound strange at first, but it's a valid NPC class and it'll not break the game... I hope.

Lapak
2010-04-29, 03:18 PM
I still don't see the problem. Points:

1.You haven't played a wizard before
2.You're concerned about overshadowing the group
3.You don't enjoy support roles
4.You want to convince your DM that 3.5 is 'broken.'

3 isn't really an issue (this is your cohort and not your character) but fortunately it's not a big deal. 1 makes the whole broken issue considerably less of a concern; if you don't actively seek out power combinations in spell selection, a randomly-assembled wizard is much less likely to be game-breaking anyway. If you DO seek them out, then you're shooting yourself in the foot.

Just throw together a wizard with a spell list made up of things that look fun and/or interesting rather than things that you know are powerful or have read about. Go ahead and make it a classic blaster with Fireballs and Lightning Bolts; you're not going to seriously overshadow the group that way. Or grab a bunch of support feats (like, oh, item creation feats) instead of metamagic enhancers. Or make it a character who specializes in Divination - actually specializes in it and takes mostly Divination spells, as opposed to a scry-and-die combo caster. The spells give you a leg up on trouble without contributing to victories in an overly active manner. There's a zillion ways to build a non-dominating wizard. If you don't know HOW to build a solid wizard, you're almost certain to do it by chance, so just grab a bunch of spells; if you DO know how then you also know how to avoid it.

Lin Bayaseda
2010-04-29, 03:21 PM
As some other posters, I honestly don't understand the problem here. Is this some kind of "I know 3.5 is unbalanced and you don't" pissing contest? Of course not.

I would suggest to the OP to simply work with his DM rather than against his DM. He lets you build a wizard cohort? Cool. Make a reasonable wizard cohort, don't break the game, have the cohort help the party w/o dominating. Problem solved.

absolmorph
2010-04-29, 03:28 PM
Course thats per attack. And if you're powering for everything it'd be +40 not +20 assuming a 2 hander. And assuming you're not mounted and charging (straight out of the PHB) or whatnot. In terms of absolute straight damage out of the PHB you're probably about on par melee and caster. It just happens to be the only thing the melee can do and almost the worst thing the caster can do.
See that? You're complicating it. I took a few spells and applied a single metamagic to them. Regardless of any outside circumstances, the spells will be hitting for that much damage (resistance and such may apply, of course).
And not taking into account the fact that Maximized Fireball hits everything in a 20ft radius for 60 damage, Ref save for half. That's up to roughly 50 enemies hit for 60 damage, which puts the total damage at around 3000.
And you can't get a full attack on a charge without going outside of core or dipping cleric (Travel Domain).

Pluto
2010-04-29, 03:45 PM
And not taking into account the fact that Maximized Fireball hits everything in a 20ft radius for 60 damage, Ref save for half. That's up to roughly 50 enemies hit for 60 damage, which puts the total damage at around 3000.
And you're not taking into account that the Fighter has equipment, feats and probably something resembling tactical decision-making.

I'm not saying that a Wizard can't outdo a Fighter in damage (I mean, Planar Bind a half dozen Pit Fiends and then see what happens), but that comparison is pretty seriously ****ed up.

aivanther
2010-04-29, 03:46 PM
You know, you could simply play a gimp cohort, making it a focused specialist evoker or enchanter. You can do some fun stuff with it, but your overall efectiveness shouldn't destroy everything. Or just focus on basic debuffs and it should be nice for the party but not feel like it's taking the fun out of everything.

It really sounds like it's a fixable solution without having to teach him. However, if this is an endemic thing then there are a couple of ways of changing his understanding, but I wouldn't do it in a campaign. Some decent suggestions have been given here. Also, simply showing him the board would work as well.

Finally you could just deck out a DMM Cleric, an Incantrix, and a Planar Shepherd and show him just how broken it can really get.

KurtKatze
2010-04-29, 03:50 PM
I will also son play a wizardin a campeign and it will also be my first try @ being a wizard ^^

but i really don't think i will break anything. LEft aside the polymorph spells, no planar binding, no gate, no celerity. Meanwhile i fear i may be outclassed by my companions ^^ but well, i am still the wizard!

So honestly as s.o. who knows this sacred Forum better than me, you should meanwhile be familiar with the cheese and thus easily able to avoid it.

Killer Angel
2010-04-29, 03:57 PM
Scorching ray. Three hits for 4d6 damage. Fireball hits a 20ft radius sphere for up to 10d6, or 15d6 with Delayed Fireball. Disintegrate deals up to 40d6, and may destroy the target. And it deals 5d6 on a save.
I said "straight out of the box", meaning not trying to be a Batman Wizard.
With just a single feat (Maximize Spell), I can make that 72 damage (36 on a save), 60 damage (30 on a save), 90 (45 on a save), 240 (30 on a save).
The fighter, on the other hand, is still swinging a sword that deals 1d8+Str+Power Attack. That tops him off at (8 + 12 + 20=) 40 damage.


I see your point, but damage spells are a bad comparison to show the brokennes of wizards. Let's stay Core.
Scorching ray requires 3 to hit (you can fail, but let's assume you hit 3 times, and you don't face enemies with immunities).
For those 72 damage, you need to be 12th lev and a 5th spell slot (or a wand).
In melee, our 12th half orc barbarian Mr. Hit McHard, with his greatsword +2 (strenght with rage 28?) and powerattacking for 5, release a medium dam. around 37, for every attack (so, easily 74 dam).
If he starts charging, in the first round he will have only 1 hit, but he can raise a little the PA.
If we consider his brother Mr. SpiritedCharge Mc. Hard, he can do the same wiz. damage only with a single attack.

Things go worse, if you use spells with ST (fireball, etc).
Even disintegrate; you deal up to 40d6 when you're a 20th wizard. It means140 dam IF the enemy fails... better to teleport Mr. Hit McHard in melee and enjoy the full routine.

The problem is: those 10d6 of the fireball, are a heritage of AD&D, when fighters were used to roll 1d6+8 dam, and the greatest enemy had a hundred hp.
With 3.5, we play at a higher level of hp and damage, but fireball is still limited to 10d6.

Now, direct damage spells, can be wonderful and powerful, but they are almost on par with a fighter / barbarian potential.

El Dorado
2010-04-29, 04:22 PM
Heh, you could *really* go old school: No concentration or combat casting or defensive casting (if he gets hit, his spell likely fizzles). Non-elite array for stats. No stat-boosting items. Fireball, lightning bolt, magic missile. Shield and stoneskin for himself. Don't spend all of his WBL. Buy a few trinkets and keep the rest in gems. No metamagic feats. No ACFs. No familiar. Heck, he doesn't even have to memorize his full complement of spells---less record keeping for you.

horseboy
2010-04-29, 04:28 PM
Well, you know there's a monk in the party so he's going to need Owl's Wisdom, Bull's Strength, Enlarge Person and Cat's Grace just to stay close to competitive. Does the rest of the party feel powerful when they get to "kill" the monster regardless of it being a helpless, blinded, stunned, mewing mess? There's always web/glittercheese, sleep, hold person/monster and the like that only render the encounter unchallenging rather than over. After that fill remaining spell slots with plot coupon spells like tongues, read languages, identify, teleport, etc...

Reluctance
2010-04-29, 04:40 PM
I'd argue that 3.5 is a lot better balanced than it sounds on the internet. Played as intended, with blaster mages and healbot clerics and whatnot, everything lines up quite well. The only problem is that game-rapingly broken stuff exists, and that since it exists the gamebreakers and heavy oppers are going to pick only it and distort your perspective.

Go ahead and play a blaster/utility mage with a few buffs up his sleeve. PrC out something that eats a caster level or two if you really feel like it. Voila, somebody who can do stuff without being a cheese build.

Prodan
2010-04-29, 04:56 PM
I'd argue that 3.5 is a lot better balanced than it sounds on the internet. Played as intended, with blaster mages and healbot clerics and whatnot, everything lines up quite well. The only problem is that game-rapingly broken stuff exists, and that since it exists the gamebreakers and heavy oppers are going to pick only it and distort your perspective.


You can't swing a dead monk in the core spell list and not hit an overpowered spell.

Yuki Akuma
2010-04-29, 05:05 PM
You can't swing a dead monk in the core spell list and not hit an overpowered spell.

That's not actually true. Yes, most of the really overpowered spells are in core, but that's because there's only a few really overpowered spells anyway.

Most spells in core are okay. Some are terrible, but most are just... adequate.

Prodan
2010-04-29, 05:14 PM
That's not actually true. Yes, most of the really overpowered spells are in core, but that's because there's only a few really overpowered spells anyway.

Most spells in core are okay. Some are terrible, but most are just... adequate.

Clarification: I'm basing "overpowered" on the criteria that, if it unbalances encounters or makes some other class cry, it's overpowered.

Yuki Akuma
2010-04-29, 05:16 PM
Clarification: I'm basing "overpowered" on the criteria that, if it unbalances encounters or makes some other class cry, it's overpowered.

Ah. Well in that case, Sleep and Color Spray are overpowered.

Welp.

Whyte_Widow
2010-04-29, 06:57 PM
You don't need to see their character sheets to judge overall effectiveness... if all else fails, just make a straight wizard (not spec) buffer. It'll take exactly zero spotlight and everyone will be happy.

im doing just this in a campaign that im playing. and im looked at as the one OPing the party. :smallcool:

Kylarra
2010-04-29, 07:00 PM
im doing just this in a campaign that im playing. and im looked at as the one OPing the party. :smallcool:
You're overshadowing the party or you're making the party overpowered? :smallconfused:

Kaiyanwang
2010-04-30, 02:01 AM
I'm not saying that a Wizard can't outdo a Fighter in damage (I mean, Planar Bind a half dozen Pit Fiends and then see what happens), but that comparison is pretty seriously ****ed up.

Wow... I WISH my players start to bind pit fiends... this could lead to a flood of funny implications...

Johel
2010-04-30, 02:55 AM
Ah. Well in that case, Sleep and Color Spray are overpowered.

Welp.

First three levels ? Sure they are.

I played an 1st Sorcerer with Sleep and Silent Image.
Unlucky will saves forced the DM had to double the number of goblins and kobolds to make the encounters somewhat challenging, as the rest of the party (1 paladin, 1 rogue, 1 priest, 1 monk) just waited to mop up the monsters that made it through the "No Man's land of Slumber".

The Cat Goddess
2010-04-30, 04:54 AM
Hmm... how to make a Cohort interesting...

Maybe some *gasp!* RPing? A bit of character background? Some interesting hooks and sidestory that the DM can develop (or not)?

Try this:

Alice the Wizardess is only 19, yet is already an 8th level Wizard. She's from a relatively poor family, but got into a good Wizard College thanks to loads of "natural talent" (i.e. she's hot... hey, I'm a girl, it's okay for me to be sexist. :smallbiggrin:). She got "sent adventuring" because she excelled so much that she was making the older students, and more importantly the wealthier students, look bad.

Having spent most of her "career" in a sheltered environment, she's amazed at the stories the player characters have to tell. She takes extensive notes and whenever combat is over she tries to investigate the downed foes to increase her knowledge (thus, she's got the Knowledge Devotion Feat).

If you have levels to spare, give her 3 levels of Human Paragon. (Paragon 1, Wizard 1, Paragon 2, Wizard for the rest). This gives her a bit more survivability, an extra Feat and only loses one Caster Level.

The "fun" of a character shouldn't come from it's raw stats and combat effectiveness... but in the RP.

Amphetryon
2010-04-30, 06:57 AM
I'll work on the assumption that the OP is still interested in making a non-support Wizard cohort (for whatever reason) that doesn't break the game. My advice would be to make an Enchanter. Enough monsters are available that are flat-out immune to the Enchanter's main gig that the DM can still challenge the rest of the party, and most of the time, a group of new players is more impressed by Big Numbers From Massive Damage than by a subtly effective character like an Enchanter.