PDA

View Full Version : Monks, Paladins, and Fighters, oh my!



Pages : [1] 2 3

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 03:04 PM
So I've been doing a ton of reading, looking over all these crazy debates and conflicting guides. But are monks and fighters really as weak as I think they are? Not very good at this optimization stuff so uhhhh yeah maybe could I get some insight or whatever they call it these days?

aivanther
2010-05-24, 03:08 PM
Here's an illustration for you:

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e119/aivanther/motivator9cdd8bd7ca1ac0da22c7f17606.jpg

Essentially, it can be broken down this way: Monk is a Tier 5 class. Like Mr. Satan/Hercule, a monk can kick a commoner's butt. Yet, he's in a world where people can destroy worlds, and hence is a gnat. To run with the big boys (dragons, demons, druids, etc) you have to be a bit more than able to beat the weak people up.

Escheton
2010-05-24, 03:08 PM
Normal play, nah. At low lvls they shine, at higher lvls, well...they prolly have died and rerolled a cleric or wizard.
If you actual try to make powerfull characters they are totally outgunned.

Amphetryon
2010-05-24, 03:15 PM
If you actual try to make powerfull competent single-class characters they are totally outgunned.FTFY :smallamused:

Greenish
2010-05-24, 03:22 PM
So I've been doing a ton of reading, looking over all these crazy debates and conflicting guides. But are monks and fighters really as weak as I think they are? Not very good at this optimization stuff so uhhhh yeah maybe could I get some insight or whatever they call it these days?They're actually pretty damn awesome tier 3 classes, it's shame they were released so late into 3.5. Those maneuvers are awesome, and the class features are pretty nice too.

Flickerdart
2010-05-24, 03:23 PM
Monk and Paladin provide nothing useful beyond 6th level. Fighter provides nothing useful beyond 2nd - Dungeoncrasher Fighter also keeps going until 6th. In contrast, the Wizards, Clerics and Druids are getting more wonderful spells and in the Druid's case, great class features.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 03:25 PM
Monk and Paladin provide nothing useful beyond 6th level. Fighter provides nothing useful beyond 2nd - Dungeoncrasher Fighter also keeps going until 6th. In contrast, the Wizards, Clerics and Druids are getting more wonderful spells and in the Druid's case, great class features.

Tell me more about these spells? I mean, I've read them, but I don't really put things together super well, and i hav'n't gotten to play a lot recently. so how do these things come together on the actual table?

i amn't doubting you, I just want to know a bit more.


They're actually pretty damn awesome tier 3 classes, it's shame they were released so late into 3.5. Those maneuvers are awesome, and the class features are pretty nice too.

what? no no no no what?

Kaiyanwang
2010-05-24, 03:29 PM
Monk and Paladin provide nothing useful beyond 6th level. Fighter provides nothing useful beyond 2nd - Dungeoncrasher Fighter also keeps going until 6th. In contrast, the Wizards, Clerics and Druids are getting more wonderful spells and in the Druid's case, great class features.

Noting "useful" is maybe too much. In casual games (wich, in truth, mostly end before high levels) you can just do fine.

I think you can have fun with a properly built fighter or a properly splatbooked paladin, if the player play nice. At least, for me happened.

Point being, that for full caster the game faces a revolution every 2 levels. Finish a feat chain every 3 levels could mean swear. Is a matter of progression rate mainly, IMO.

Greenish
2010-05-24, 03:29 PM
Tell me more about these spells? I mean, I've read them, but I don't really put things together super well, and i hav'n't gotten to play a lot recently. so how do these things come together on the actual table?

i amn't doubting you, I just want to know a bit more.Web (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/web.htm) > fighter.
Grease (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/grease.htm) > fighter.
Glitterdust (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/glitterdust.htm) > fighter.

[Edit]:
what? no no no no what?What? Oh, did you confuse the NPC classes in PHB with the real fighting classes? The latter are from Tome of Battle.

sofawall
2010-05-24, 03:32 PM
They're actually pretty damn awesome tier 3 classes, it's shame they were released so late into 3.5. Those maneuvers are awesome, and the class features are pretty nice too.

/thread. You win, sir.

ErrantX
2010-05-24, 03:32 PM
Really, the above three classes are only really viable at low level, or in unoptimized games within a few tiers of each other. If you're consistently having Tier 3 and above characters in the party, those three classes really have no business being used at all. They're just not going to do it, beyond small dips to improved the higher tier classes.

-X

Flickerdart
2010-05-24, 03:32 PM
Tell me more about these spells? I mean, I've read them, but I don't really put things together super well, and i hav'n't gotten to play a lot recently. so how do these things come together on the actual table?

i amn't doubting you, I just want to know a bit more.
At 1st level, the Wizard can end encounters with a single Sleep. The Fighter, Paladin or Monk has to whack the target and get whacked back. The Druid can go have a nap because his Animal Companion is better than the Fighter at fighting. And it just gets worse.
Take, for example, Fly. This spell is accessible at 5th level. What can a Fighter do against Fly? Nothing. What can a Paladin do against Fly? Nothing, unless his mount flies. What can a Monk do against fly? Cry himself to sleep because he can't even pick up a bow and plink away for pathetic damage.



what? no no no no what?
He is implying that the Swordsage, Crusader and Warblade are the "real" Monk, Paladin and Fighter. And he'd be right.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 03:33 PM
Web (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/web.htm) > fighter.
Grease (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/grease.htm) > fighter.
Glitterdust (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/glitterdust.htm) > fighter.

[Edit]:What? Oh, did you confuse the NPC classes in PHB with the real fighting classes? The latter are from Tome of Battle.

Tome of battle? I've heard of it an' my Storyteller owns a copy, but it seems sorta heavy on the supernatural stuff in some of the schools, like desert wind. Do I have to take desert wind stuffs if I'm a swordsage or is it optional? I've only skimmed, I'm really sorry. I'll try to read it by tomorrow okay?

But all of thos offer saves that aren't necessarily very hard. certainly a good paladin could make them, with cha to saves right?

and I could build a mounted fighter who rode like, a flying eagle or griffin, right? aren't there those figurines or stuff? I know that this isn't class-features, really, but you get wealth and items for a reason, no?

I'm sort of starting to see what you mean, but I'd appreciate some concrete-ish examples maybe. like builds and links to fights and stuff.

Greenish
2010-05-24, 03:37 PM
Tome of battle? I've heard of it an' my Storyteller owns a copy, but it seems sorta heavy on the supernatural stuff in some of the schools, like desert wind. Do I have to take desert wind stuffs if I'm a swordsage or is it optional? I've only skimmed, I'm really sorry. I'll try to read it by tomorrow okay?Some schools have more supernatural stuff, some have less. You get to pick your own maneuvers, and swordsage has the most supernatural disciplines. Well, what'd you expect from a monk?

Tiger Claw, Iron Heart, Diamond Mind, White Raven and Stone Dragon are pretty much completely "natural" schools, Devoted Spirit is nominally too (as in, having "Ex" tags instead of "Su"), and the rest of the schools have varying mixes.

[Edit]:
But all of thos offer saves that aren't necessarily very hard. certainly a good paladin could make them, with cha to saves right?Many of the ones that offer saves do so because they have rather strong rider effects. Many, if not most of the maneuvers don't allow saving throws.

and I could build a mounted fighter who rode like, a flying eagle or griffin, right? aren't there those figurines or stuff? I know that this isn't class-features, really, but you get wealth and items for a reason, no?Classes that have actual class features get wealth and items too, no?

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 03:38 PM
Some schools have more supernatural stuff, some have less. You get to pick your own maneuvers, and swordsage has the most supernatural disciplines. Well, what'd you expect from a monk?

Tiger Claw, Iron Heart, Diamond Mind, White Raven and Stone Dragon are pretty much completely "natural" schools, Devoted Spirit is nominally too (as in, having "Ex" tags instead of "Su"), and the rest of the schools have varying mixes.

that sounds... really nice. but what if I want to play a monk right down to the hitty bits with fists part?? bear in mind I haven't read it caref'lly yets.

Flickerdart
2010-05-24, 03:38 PM
Tome of battle? I've heard of it an' my Storyteller owns a copy, but it seems sorta heavy on the supernatural stuff in some of the schools, like desert wind. Do I have to take desert wind stuffs if I'm a swordsage or is it optional? I've only skimmed, I'm really sorry. I'll try to read it by tomorrow okay?

But all of thos offer saves that aren't necessarily very hard. certainly a good paladin could make them, with cha to saves right?

and I could build a mounted fighter who rode like, a flying eagle or griffin, right? aren't there those figurines or stuff? I know that this isn't class-features, really, but you get wealth and items for a reason, no?

I'm sort of starting to see what you mean, but I'd appreciate some concrete-ish examples maybe.
A basic Wizard's save DCs at 1st level are 10 (base) + 1 (spell level) +4 (INT) = 15. A Basic Fighter's Will save at 1st level is no greater than +2. The Paladin very often can't afford a good Charisma score.
The mounted Fighter runs the risk of having his mount shot out of under him with a Disintegrate spell and taking 20d6 fall damage. It's practically impossible to purchase a level-appropriate mount.

Kylarra
2010-05-24, 03:41 PM
that sounds... really nice. but what if I want to play a monk right down to the hitty bits with fists part?? bear in mind I haven't read it caref'lly yets.swordsage has an unarmed variant.

Greenish
2010-05-24, 03:41 PM
that sounds... really nice. but what if I want to play a monk right down to the hitty bits with fists part?? bear in mind I haven't read it caref'lly yets.There's unarmed variant of swordsage in there (in swordsage's adaption). It can do anything a monk can, but better, and it's actually useful.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 03:44 PM
A basic Wizard's save DCs at 1st level are 10 (base) + 1 (spell level) +4 (INT) = 15. A Basic Fighter's Will save at 1st level is no greater than +2. The Paladin very often can't afford a good Charisma score.
The mounted Fighter runs the risk of having his mount shot out of under him with a Disintegrate spell and taking 20d6 fall damage. It's practically impossible to purchase a level-appropriate mount.

Explain the cha stuff. we use a pretty high point buy, so mebbe I'm sheltered. :smallsmile:

Umm, about the mount, that seems like sort of a corner case no? like, it wastes an action doesn't it? I'll pay 2k gold for a tear-away shield like that.


There's unarmed variant of swordsage in there (in swordsage's adaption). It can do anything a monk can, but better, and it's actually useful.

page cite?

also, I've seen some pretty solid archer builds that at least 4 dipped fighter, maybe I'm off-base when it comes to quality, like maybe you guys have different standards? What's good damage to you?

Yorrin
2010-05-24, 03:47 PM
that sounds... really nice. but what if I want to play a monk right down to the hitty bits with fists part?? bear in mind I haven't read it caref'lly yets.

Swordsage has an option to give up medium armor proficiency in exchange for gaining the Monk's unarmed damage progression. Since the Swordsage gets Wis to AC when wearing light armor you don't want medium armor anyway, so it's a no-brainer. This is the primary reason Swordsage is analogous to Monk, but 10dozen times better.

Haha- the ninjas are out in force today (by which I mean shadow-hand swordsages...)

Flickerdart
2010-05-24, 03:48 PM
Explain the cha stuff. we use a pretty high point buy, so mebbe I'm sheltered. :smallsmile:

Umm, about the mount, that seems like sort of a corner case no? like, it wastes an action doesn't it? I'll pay 2k gold for a tear-away shield like that.

A Paladin needs STR (to hit dudes), CON (to withstand hits from dudes), WIS (to cast spells) and CHA (to saves and Smite). Likewise, a Monk needs STR, CON, DEX and WIS. With even a 32 point buy, it's very difficult to get all of those stats above a 14 or so. Meanwhile, the Wizard can afford 18 INT no problem because it's the only stat he needs.

It doesn't waste an action, because the action has completely crippled your offense. The Wizard could just as easily Dominate you and make you kill your own mount, or to turn on your allies.

Edit: Archer builds rely on a bonus source of damage (Sneak Attack or Skirmish), and a ton of feats (Greater Manyshot, Improved Precise Shot, etc). A few Fighter levels help with those feats, but they are by no means the primary focus of a build.

Volthawk
2010-05-24, 03:50 PM
page cite?


End of the Swordsage class section in the book, page 20.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 03:51 PM
A Paladin needs STR (to hit dudes), CON (to withstand hits from dudes), WIS (to cast spells) and CHA (to saves and Smite). Likewise, a Monk needs STR, CON, DEX and WIS. With even a 32 point buy, it's very difficult to get all of those stats above a 14 or so. Meanwhile, the Wizard can afford 18 INT no problem because it's the only stat he needs.

It doesn't waste an action, because the action has completely crippled your offense. The Wizard could just as easily Dominate you and make you kill your own mount, or to turn on your allies.

Okay, this is starting to make sense, but can you link me to some examples? I mean, it sounds like this wizard can do a lot more than the ones in my playgroups over the years..... this is sort of a rude awakening for me.

as for paladin, that seems really dumb. aren't there feats that make things better or stuff, and if not, why was it designed that way? even I know better....

BUt I just wanna see, rather-of, some examples, hokay?

Greenish
2010-05-24, 03:59 PM
Okay, this is starting to make sense, but can you link me to some examples? I mean, it sounds like this wizard can do a lot more than the ones in my playgroups over the years..... this is sort of a rude awakening for me.Lookie here (http://www.crystalkeep.com/d20/rules/DnD3.5Index-Spells-SorcererWizard.pdf).

as for paladin, that seems really dumb. aren't there feats that make things better or stuff, and if not, why was it designed that way? even I know better....But WotC didn't, not when they launched the game. They seriously overestimated full BAB and underestimated spells.

[Edit]:
BUt I just wanna see, rather-of, some examples, hokay?Lets see then, this is from the class tier thread (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5293.0): Situation 1: A Black Dragon has been plaguing an area, and he lives in a trap filled cave. Deal with him.

Situation 2: You have been tasked by a nearby country with making contact with the leader of the underground slave resistance of an evil tyranical city state, and get him to trust you.

Situation 3: A huge army of Orcs is approaching the city, and should be here in a week or so. Help the city prepare for war.

Okay, so, here we go.

Tier 6: A Commoner. Situation 1: If he's REALLY optimized, he could be a threat to the dragon, but a single attack from the dragon could take him out too. He can't really offer help getting to said dragon. He could fill up the entire cave with chickens, but that's probably not a good idea. Really, he's dead weight unless his build was perfectly optimized for this situation (see my Commoner charger build for an example). Situation 2: Well, without any stealth abilities or diplomacy, he's not too handy here, again unless he's been exactly optimized for this precise thing (such as through Martial Study to get Diplomacy). Really, again his class isn't going to help much here. Situation 3: Again, no help from his class, though the chicken thing might be amusing if you're creative.

Tier 5: A Fighter. Situation 1: If he's optimized for this sort of thing (a tripper might have trouble, though a charger would be handy if he could get off a clear shot, and an archer would likely work) he can be a threat during the main fight, but he's probably just about useless for sneaking down through the cave and avoiding any traps the dragon has set out without alerting said dragon. Most likely the party Rogue would want to hide him in a bag of holding or something. Once in the fight if he's optimized he'll be solid, but if not (if he's a traditional SAB build or a dual weilding monkey grip type) he's going to be a liability in the combat (though not as bad as the Commoner). Situation 2: As the commoner before, his class really won't help here. His class just doesn't provide any useful tools for the job. It's possible (but very unlikely) that he's optimized in a way that helps in this situation, just as with the Commoner. Situation 3: Again, his class doesn't help much, but at least he could be pretty useful during the main battle as a front line trooper of some sort. Hack up the enemy and rack up a body count.

Tier 4: The Rogue. Situation 1: Well he can certainly help get the party to the dragon, even if he's not totally optimized for it. His stealth and detection abilities will come in handy here, and if he puts the less stealthy people in portable holes and the like he's good to go. During the combat he's likely not that helpful (it's hard to sneak attack a dragon) but if he had a lot of prep time he might have been able to snag a scroll or wand of Shivering Touch, in which case he could be extremely helpful... he just has to be really prepared and on the ball, and the resources have to be available in advance. He's quite squishy though, and that dragon is a serious threat. Situation 2: With his stealth and diplomacy, he's all over this. Maybe not 100% perfect, but still pretty darn solid. An individual build might not have all the necessary skills, but most should be able to make do. Situation 3: Perhaps he can use Gather Information and such to gain strategic advantages before the battle... that would be handy. There's a few he's pretty likely to be able to pull off. He might even be able to use Diplomacy to buff the army a bit and at least get them into a good morale situation pre battle. Or, if he's a different set up, he could perhaps go out and assassinate a few of the orc commanders before the fight, which could be handy. And then during the fight he could do the same. It's not incredible, but it's something.

Tier 3: The Beguiler. Situation 1: Again, getting through the cave is easy, perhaps easier with spell support. And again, if he's really prepared in advance, Shivering Touch via UMD is a possibility. But he's also got spells that could be quite useful here depending on the situation, and if he's optimized heavily, this is going to be pretty easy... Shadowcraft Mage, perhaps? Or Earth Dreamer? Either way, he's got a lot of available options, though like the Rogue he's somewhat squishy (and that Dragon won't fall for many illusions with his Blindsense) so he still needs that party support. Situation 2: Again, with his skills he's all over this one, plus the added ability to cast spells like charm makes this one much easier, allowing him to make contacts in the city quickly while he figures out where this guy is. Situation 3: Like the Rogue, he can get strategic advantages and be all over the Diplomacy. He's not quite as good at assassinating people if he takes that route (though sneaking up invisible and then using a coup de gras with a scythe is pretty darn effective), but using illusions during the fight will create some serious chaos in his favor. A single illusion of a wall of fire can really disrupt enemy formations, for example.

Tier 2: The Sorcerer. Situation 1: It really depends on the Sorcerer's spell load out. If he's got Greater Floating Disk, Spectral Hand, and Shivering Touch, this one's going to be easy as pie, since he can just float down (and carry his party in the process) to avoid many traps, then nail the dragon in one shot from a distance. If he doesn't he'd need scrolls with the same issues that the UMD Rogue and Beguiler would need. If he's got Explosive Runes he could create a bomb that would take out the Dragon in one shot. If he's got Polymorph he could turn the party melee into a Hydra for extra damage. If he's got Alter Self he could turn himself into a Skulk to get down there sneakily. Certainly, it's possible that the Sorcerer could own this scenario... if he has the right spells known. That's always the hard part for a Sorcerer. Situation 2: Again, depends on the spell. Does he have divinations that will help him know who's part of the resistance and who's actually an evil spy for the Tyranical Govenerment? Does he have charm? Alter Self would help a ton here too for disguise purposes if he has it. Once again, the options exist that could totally make this easy, but he might not have those options. Runestaffs would help a bit, but not that much. Scrolls would help too, but that requires access to them and good long term preparation. Situation 3: Again, does he have Wall of Iron or Wall of Stone to make fortifications? Does he have Wall of Fire to disrupt the battlefield? How about Mind Rape and Love's Pain to kill off the enemy commanders without any ability to stop him? Does he have Blinding Glory on his spell list, or Shapechange, or Gate? Well, maybe. He's got the power, but if his spells known don't apply here he can't do much. So, maybe he dominates this one, maybe not.

Tier 1: The Wizard. Situation 1: Memorize Greater Floating Disk, Shivering Touch, and Spectral Hand. Maybe Alter Self too for stealth reasons. Kill dragon. Memorize Animate Dead too, because Dragons make great minions (seriously, there's special rules for using that spell on dragons). Sweet, you have a new horsie! Or, you know, maybe you Mind Rape/Love's Pain and kill the dragon before he even knows you exist, then float down and check it out. Or maybe you create a horde of the dead and send them in, triggering the traps with their bodies. Or do the haunt shift trick and waltz in with a hardness of around 80 and giggle. Perhaps you cast Genesis to create a flowing time plane and then sit and think about what to do for a year while only a day passes on the outside... and cast Explosive Runes every day during that year. I'm sure you can come up with something. It's really your call. Situation 2: Check your spell list. Alter Self and Disguise Self can make you look like whoever you need to look like. Locate Creature has obvious utility. Heck, Contact Other Plane could be a total cheating method of finding the guy you're trying to find. Clairvoyance is also handy. It's all there. Situation 3: Oh no, enemy army! Well, if you've optimized for it, there's always the locate city bomb (just be careful not to blow up the friendly guys too). But if not, Love's Pain could assassinate the leaders. Wall of Iron/Stone could create fortifications, or be combined with Fabricate to armour up some of the troops. Or you could just cast Blinding Glory and now the entire enemy army is blind with no save for caster level hours. Maybe you could Planar Bind an appropriate outsider to help train the troops before the battle. Push comes to shove, Gate in a Solar, who can cast Miracle (which actually does have a "I win the battle" option)... or just Shapechange into one, if you prefer.

So yeah, as you move up the Tiers you go from weak, unadaptable, and predictable (that Commoner's got very few useful options) to strong, adaptable, and unpredictable (who knows what that Wizard is going to do?). A Wizard can always apply a great deal of strength very efficiently, whether it's Shivering Touch on the Dragon or Blinding Glory on an enemy army. The Sorcerer has the power, but he may not have power that he can actually apply to the situation. The Beguiler has even less raw power and may have to use UMD to pull it off. The Rogue is even further along that line. And the Fighter has power in very specific areas which are less likely to be useful in a given situation.

That's really what the Tiers are about. How much does this class enable you to achieve what you want in a given situation? The more versitile your power, the more likely that the answer to that question is "a lot." If you've got tons of power and limited versitility (that's you, Sorcerers and charging Barbarians) then sometimes the answer is a lot, but sometimes it's not much. If you've got tons of versitility but limited power (hi, Rogue!) then it's often "a decent amount." If you've got little of both (Commoner!) then yeah, it's often "it doesn't."

And of course reversing that and applying it to DMs, you get "how many effective options does this class give for solving whatever encounters I throw at them?" For Commoners, the answer may be none. For Fighters, it's sometimes none, sometimes 1, maybe 2, but you generally know in advance what it will be (if he's got Improved Trip and a Spiked Chain and all that, he's probably going to be tripping stuff, just a hint). For Wizards, it's tons, and they're all really potent, and you have no idea how he's going to do it. Does he blind the enemy army or assassinate all its leaders or turn into a Solar and just arbitrarily win the battle? There's no way to know until he memorizes his spells for the day (and even then you might not see it coming).

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 04:02 PM
Lookie here (http://www.crystalkeep.com/d20/rules/DnD3.5Index-Spells-SorcererWizard.pdf).
But WotC didn't, not when they launched the game. They seriously overestimated full BAB and underestimated spells.

what about erratas and stuffs?

I mean build examples, and ideally some fights or stuff, and the best would be... I unno, like some dungeon pbps?

edit: holy crap! that's a lot of spells!!!
oh god I had no idea what the heck were they doing? seriously, how cou-- we own most of these books! I'm going to go strangle some arcanists. I'll be back later tonight.

Amphetryon
2010-05-24, 04:03 PM
Paladin needs, at a reasonable minimum, 13 STR (5 points; Power Attack), 10 DEX (2 points; penalties to Ride checks at low levels are un-good), 14 CON (6 points; "Hit Points are good for you!" - PhoenixInferno), 14 WIS (6 points; spells), 14 CHA (6 points; too many class features run off CHA to go lower and still be a viable Paladin).
_5
+2
+6
+6
+6
----
25 points, and your Paladin is only marginally smarter than his Special Mount. That's before we adjust for race, which in almost every case exacerbates the problem. By contrast, a Barbarian needs a 14 STR (6 points) a 10 DEX (2 points) a 14 CON (6 points) and a 10 WIS (2 points) at the same 'reasonable minimum' of effectiveness, freeing up 9 points in the book-standard 25 point buy to augment one of those four stats (STR or CON, almost always).

Not only that, but with this 'reasonable minimum' character, the Paladin will not be able to efficiently use Power Attack until at least 4th level when the STR can go up to 14. That means the Paladin will be unable to do as much damage as any other front-line beater type given average rolls, and Paladins are, at their essence, a front-line beater class.

Without splat support, the Paladin's Smite ability will only come into play once a day at low levels, which is insufficient to make a difference in most reported experience. With splat support, the Paladin without an exceptional player at the helm catches up in power to where other melee-types were before the splats were added, and the other melee-types can reasonably be assumed to benefit equally from splats.

In other words, the Paladin is playing catch-up for most of his career in order to be as good as a low-powered class. That sounds like poor design. Add to this the Paladin's Code that so often becomes a great big 'Kick Me' sign to wave at the DM, and you need a very special player to take on the burden of playing a Paladin.

Boci
2010-05-24, 04:03 PM
Okay, this is starting to make sense, but can you link me to some examples? I mean, it sounds like this wizard can do a lot more than the ones in my playgroups over the years..... this is sort of a rude awakening for me.

Greace: 50% chance to not be able to move and a chance to fall prone, affects multiple targets.
Colourspray: Save or loose, affects multiple targets, against a hobgoblin, they have a better chance of failing their save than the fighter has a landing a blow.

Those are the 2 most dangerous first level spells to the best of my knowledge. I do not think any splatbooks manage to rival them.


as for paladin, that seems really dumb. aren't there feats that make things better or stuff, and if not, why was it designed that way? even I know better....

Serenity. Only problem is, its from Dragon Magazine, which has a bad reputation and often is not allowed.

Kaiyanwang
2010-05-24, 04:06 PM
Okay, this is starting to make sense, but can you link me to some examples? I mean, it sounds like this wizard can do a lot more than the ones in my playgroups over the years..... this is sort of a rude awakening for me.


A prepared wizard can theoretically defeat anything. In real play, it depends from a lot of condition (GM, experience of the player and so on). As an example:


Web (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/web.htm) > fighter.
Grease (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/grease.htm) > fighter.
Glitterdust (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/glitterdust.htm) > fighter.


It's hard to hold a web in a flaming wood, near a volcano, o in the elemental plane of fire.

The above for grease (but could be a nice idea for additional damage maybe :smalltongue:). The same, cast grease underwater, in a semi sunken temple, in a swamp.

Cast glitterdust to a creature with blindsight. To a bunch of Lumi paladins (crusaders :smalltongue:?) and clerics.

The same with the flying wizard. Sometimes a full attack or two with a composite is enough, or a lucky bolas strike. Maybe he has a wind wall prepared (very likely, but people ban evocation because it sucks so..)

What I mean? That the classes are fine that way? No. That magic is not powerful? Nope. BTW, MADness people adressed is a very annoying problem.

I'm just warning you from absolute statements.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 04:07 PM
Are there any fixen for these that people would recommend?

TheThan
2010-05-24, 04:08 PM
Ok here’s the break down.

The best character classes in the game (3.5 here mind) and the characters that scale as they increase in level. The reason for this is the way spellcasting works. Look at what a spell caster gains when he levels up:
More spells per day
More spells known/prepared
Current spells increase in power
Gain new spell level (new higher level spells)

This is a snowball effect. Every time they gain a new level, they gain more power, but every time they gain more power, they gain extra power beyond what they just got.

Now each spell level is more powerful than the previous one. 2nd level spells are more powerful than 1st level spells which are more powerful than cantrips. You get the idea. This is where the snowballing actually kicks in. As casters grow in power, they gain more and more powerful magic spells to cast. Many of these spells can outright bypass an encounter and many more can outright defeat a monster in a single casting. Comparatively, a fighter has to try to reduce an enemy’s hit points to zero, while suffering damage at the same time. A caster, just sits back, throws a spells or two and calls it a day.

Now look at Fighters, paladins and monks, they do not have any class abilities that scale with level. Therefor they do not snowball and they do not gain the sort of power that casters have. Paladins and rangers have half casting, which is strictly speaking weaker than full casting, as you have 50% of what a full caster can do (being down a minimum of 4 caster levels). By the time the paladin gets his 1st level spells at 4th level (assuming he has a high enough modifier), a cleric has already had 2nd level spells for two levels). Remember that the cleric has 3 levels of spell casting (starting at 0). If the paladin doesn’t have a high modifier then his casting is even further behind the casters and is about 1/4 of what the divine casters are.


This is an inherent imbalance in the game system. You can do three things to balance this, you can nerf casters, buff non casters or replace one. In the case of TOB, it replaces the melee characters with other melee characters that have the ability to scale in a similar way to magic. Just as ToM replaces the casters with weaker spell casting classes. While I’m not an expert on all things 4E, it looks like the designers have taken steps to rebalance the game so that everyone has a fair shot at being powerful.

I hope that helps out.

Greenish
2010-05-24, 04:08 PM
Are there any fixen for these that people would recommend?Play 4th Edition if you want class balance.

AtopTheMountain
2010-05-24, 04:10 PM
You could also try Pathfinder. The Paladin is almost completely fixed (the new Smite Evil is awesome), the Fighter is... better, and I haven't looked at the Monk much yet.

EDIT: Also, the Pally's healing ability is greater, and it no longer needs Wisdom at all. Yeah, I like the Pathfinder Paladin.

Faleldir
2010-05-24, 04:11 PM
You see an enemy "tank" and "healer" with the same AC and HP. The "healer" has Holy Word prepared. If you attack the "healer" first, the "tank" can't do anything to stop you. Of course, you're not supposed to know any of that, but it doesn't matter. The "tank" is basically a decoy, a glorified hireling.

Boci
2010-05-24, 04:11 PM
Are there any fixen for these that people would recommend?

Decide as a party what tier you want to play and don't use classes above and below that.

Optimystik
2010-05-24, 04:12 PM
Now each spell level is more powerful than the previous one. 2nd level spells are more powerful than 1st level spells which are more powerful than cantrips. You get the idea.

You forgot a key point - you can prepare lower-leveled spells in high-level slots, so even when the 1st-level spells prove more applicable to the task at hand, having access to 2nd-level slots just lets you cast more of them.


Are there any fixen for these that people would recommend?

Haven't people been recommending Tome of Battle all throughout this thread? What more do you need? :smallconfused:

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 04:13 PM
You could also try Pathfinder. The Paladin is almost completely fixed (the new Smite Evil is awesome), the Fighter is... better, and I haven't looked at the Monk much yet.

Paladin looks a little better..... Fighter is hardly changed, and monk is still just okay given what I've learned so far. I want meatier fixes. ToB is a good start, but is there something where I won't have to learn a large sub-sys?

tool-mastery being a beast, after alls. (http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~cah/G51ISS/Documents/NoSilverBullet.html)


Okay, I'd still like some links to fights and builds and stuffs. So far, we're talking all floaty wot like, and I'd really love to get some real grounding, if no one would mind much over.

Flickerdart
2010-05-24, 04:14 PM
Yes, you can contrive situations when one of those options is suboptimal. But that's the Wizard's power - he has a hundred other tricks. The Fighter built to charge will not be able to do anything else effectively. The fighter built to trip can only trip. If his one trick doesn't apply? Tough.

A Wizard can decide to change his play style overnight (by memorizing new spells). A Sorcerer can do so in one level (by picking new spells to use all day). A Fighter can never change what he does in Core. A Paladin never got a choice to start with!

Boci
2010-05-24, 04:16 PM
Paladin looks a little better..... Fighter is hardly changed, and monk is still just okay given what I've learned so far. I want meatier fixes. ToB is a good start, but is there something where I won't have to learn a large sub-sys?

Depends. There are loads of fighter fixes. Most people think they don't work. I think the most highly reguarded one is the brilliant gameologist one.


Okay, I'd still like some links to fights and builds and stuffs. So far, we're talking all floaty wot like, and I'd really love to get some real grounding, if no one would mind much over.

I gathered a couple here: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137352

General consensus was lockdown fighter is the only one who can function in a wide variety of fights.

TheThan
2010-05-24, 04:30 PM
You forgot a key point - you can prepare lower-leveled spells in high-level slots, so even when the 1st-level spells prove more applicable to the task at hand, having access to 2nd-level slots just lets you cast more of them.



Yes, there is also that.
Also wizards can select their spells in the middle of the day so they can change their spell list on the fly and defeat any given encounter. Granted they must have prior knowledge about it. But that is what the scry spell is for.


The OP mentioned wealth by level and gearing out to be comparable to casters. There are two problems to this, one these weapons and gear are not part of your class features so you are not guaranteed to get them. Meaning the Dm could choose to not give you access to them. Also the casters in the party has access to just as much wealth as the fighters, and can spend it on gear as well, creating a greater snowball effect.


Another problem with fighters is many of the feats they get have requirements tacked on to them. You must have a str score of x or a dex score of Y, and you must have ABC feats before you can get this feat. A wizard is under no such constrictions. He can get summon monster IV without taking summon monster I, II and III. Therefor he can cherry pick his spells from the beginning and a fighter cannot cherry pick his feats, he must focus heavily into one or possibly two feat trees. this makes the fighter a one trick pony, and the wizard a vastly more versatile character.

Eldariel
2010-05-24, 04:30 PM
Test of Spite (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=150821) contains a catalogue of fights and such. May want to check those out. Also checking out the Play-by-Post section should be useful. And it just so happens, Test of Spite has rewritten "Fighter" (called Warmarked), Paladin and Monk. Also, Tome of Battle is very useful as a "fix"; that is, Crusader, Swordsage, Unarmed Swordsage (Unarmed adaptation for Swordsage is on page 20, under "Adaptations"; basically, make it unarmored, give it Monk Unarmed Strike and yeah) and Warblade cover Paladin (Crusader), Rogue (Swordsage), Monk (Unarmed Swordsage), Fighter (Warblade) and Barbarian (Warblade) quite well. Rogue slightly less so, but with small dip Swordsages make excellent Rogues. Do note that Monks are already inherently mystical with lots of Supernatural abilities (just check their stat block) so Swordsage's Shadow Hand and Desert Wind fit right home there.

But you can make a respectable Swordsage with 0 Supernatural maneuvers. And you can fluff some Su maneuvers as extraordinary feats of skill, if desired; just don't use 'em in Anti-Magic Fields (or just agree with DM so you can; they aren't among the strongest in the book anyways so it wouldn't break anything) and you're fine. Biggest thing missing is Ranger, really, but that's easy enough to Homebrew (I'm playing a "Sublime Way Ranger" right now in a low-magic game; basically Ranger with Warblade maneuvers from slightly different school list instead of spells, and some slightly delayed ).

There's also some homebrew available in our homebrew forums to cover the largest things the book misses in Archery and few specialized schools (a mundane skulking school and something to tie psionics to it are the biggest lackings). Useful links include:
Martial Compendium (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19525674/Martial_Compendium) - A great cross-forum resource for ToB homebrew, but no longer updated and with some dead links (ask me if you want anything particular, I've got most of them)
The Age of the Warriors (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134088) - ToB expansion project here on GITP with few very solid schools, classes and such.
Refactoring ToB Archery (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=143785) - Accounts for the single biggest lacking of the book.

Morty
2010-05-24, 04:33 PM
As always, people are exagerrating. Yes, fighters, paladins & monks are much weaker than wizards, clerics and other casters but that doesn't mean they can't be played and enjoyed in a relatively unoptimized party below 10th level or so. Well, maybe except monks, they're kinda hopeless. Above 10th level, problems may and will crop up even if noone really optimizes. So I'd say you should play without houserules and then decide what you need.

Da Beast
2010-05-24, 04:34 PM
Explain the cha stuff. we use a pretty high point buy, so mebbe I'm sheltered. :smallsmile:

Umm, about the mount, that seems like sort of a corner case no? like, it wastes an action doesn't it? I'll pay 2k gold for a tear-away shield like that.



page cite?

also, I've seen some pretty solid archer builds that at least 4 dipped fighter, maybe I'm off-base when it comes to quality, like maybe you guys have different standards? What's good damage to you?

Four levels of fighter is pretty much the maximum you can fight into a build and not have it come back to bite you. Those four levels will give you 3 bonus feats which is great for feat intensive builds like archery or two weapon fighting, but fighter isn't really the focus of the build.

Or to put it more simply, would you call a ranger 16/fighter 4 focused on archery a fighter build or a ranger build?

Kaiyanwang
2010-05-24, 04:35 PM
Paladin looks a little better..... Fighter is hardly changed, and monk is still just okay given what I've learned so far. I want meatier fixes.

About pathfinder can't speak for monk yet (even if vital strike line and full level to CMB and CMD are helping a lot), but:

Paladin now is far better IMO. Smite works at range too (this is an huge improvement trust me) and is scary against Evil Dragon, Fiends and Undead, but at the same time you don't steal the spotlight against neutral beings. LoH and Mercy are fine too - now the Paladin is really the Defender of the oppresed and the Punisher of the evildoers.

Fighter changes are more subtle and rely on how the combat maneuvers work now. To-hit bonuses, by class features and feats, apply to trip sunder etc if delivered with the right weapon. You just have to be smart to combine the right feat combination with the right set of tools.

As an example, a 20th level fighter could use vital strike feat chain to move and damage an enemy armor, lowering AC and increasing the rogue's to-hit; or prepare an action against a flying pit fiend spell-like trying to distrupt it (and adding 3d8 to the concentration DC), or to simply crit a 7d12+184 with a two-handed axe.

Moreover, the system encourages teamwok: in the above sunder example, other two synergies happen, in chain: the rogue flanks, giving a +2 to the sunder attempt, and the fighter brings in he sunder armor and the flank bonus, too.

tyckspoon
2010-05-24, 04:36 PM
Or to put it more simply, would you call a ranger 16/fighter 4 focused on archery a fighter build or a ranger build?

I'd call it a horribly missed chance to be a Swift Hunter.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 04:47 PM
Morty, can I see some backing arguments for what you said there?
I'd obv like muchly if these peeps were making big tales outta small ones, but they've offered up a ton of meat. Tell me more about why you think the gap is smaller?

Eldariel:
That's a TON of material. And a ton of fights. Jesus. How long have they been doing that stuff?

Yora
2010-05-24, 04:48 PM
Why would you take 16 levels of ranger for archery? It gets you three arhcery feats, while another 16 levels of fighter would give you 8 feats.

I've seen and heard what people say about balance and optimization in D&D for years, but still I don't care about it: PHB only, low- to mid-level campaigns, and adventures that don't revolve about killing things, and I never seen any reasons why the balance between fighers and wizards would need to change.
(I do take away natural spell and free heavy armor for clerics, but that's about it.)

Da Beast
2010-05-24, 04:49 PM
I'd call it a horribly missed chance to be a Swift Hunter.

Not every one has Complete Scoundrel :smalltongue:

Morty
2010-05-24, 04:49 PM
I'm not saying the gap is smaller. The gap is huge; there's no denying that. What I am saying is that the gap might not necessarily appear in the actual game to the extent described on the forums. So you shouldn't worry about it so much in advance; fix the problems when they appear.

Yora
2010-05-24, 04:53 PM
Not every one has Complete Scoundrel :smalltongue:
Then you're just some kid with a pen and some dice who should better keep playing pokemon and stop pretending to play a real mens game like D&D. :smallwink:

Ravens_cry
2010-05-24, 04:58 PM
You see an enemy "tank" and "healer" with the same AC and HP. The "healer" has Holy Word prepared. Who do you attack first?
How in hells does a baddie know the "healer" has Holy Word prepared? For that matter, how do they know the AC and HP? That is DM metagaming.:smallmad:

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 04:59 PM
How in hells does a baddie know the "healer" has Holy Word prepared? For that matter, how do they know the AC and HP? That is DM metagaming.:smallmad:

Well, Holy Word is pretty darn good. I'd prepare it if I was a cleric, I think.

Boci
2010-05-24, 05:00 PM
How in hells does a baddie know the "healer" has Holy Word prepared? For that matter, how do they know the AC and HP? That is DM metagaming.:smallmad:

Inteligent monster would could easily have details on how hard it is to kill a cleric vs. a palaldin/fighter, how good each is at defense and offense.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 05:01 PM
Why would you take 16 levels of ranger for archery? It gets you three arhcery feats, while another 16 levels of fighter would give you 8 feats.

I've seen and heard what people say about balance and optimization in D&D for years, but still I don't care about it: PHB only, low- to mid-level campaigns, and adventures that don't revolve about killing things, and I never seen any reasons why the balance between fighers and wizards would need to change.
(I do take away natural spell and free heavy armor for clerics, but that's about it.)

But if I wanted to play E6, I think I'd just play E6. :)
I want to be able to play the game without worrying about constraining it to invisibly defined and largely unspoken use-cases. I think that's reasonable.

what if, g'dhelpus, we wanna kill things for a living, Yora? Are we a doin' it wrong?

Amphetryon
2010-05-24, 05:02 PM
adventures that don't revolve about killing things, and I never seen any reasons why the balance between fighers and wizards would need to change.
(I do take away natural spell and free heavy armor for clerics, but that's about it.)I would argue that adventures that don't revolve about (around) killing things will ofttimes be better served by a system other than 3.X D&D. It can be done, but it's not what the system is ostensibly designed toward. Playing the game in a way other than the presumptive design intent often obfuscates specific problems with the system...sometimes while highlighting other problems most never see.

I would also argue that removing Natural Spell as an option is a nerf, albeit a small one, to a Druid, which obfuscates disparity by a smidge.

JaronK
2010-05-24, 05:06 PM
Why would you take 16 levels of ranger for archery? It gets you three arhcery feats, while another 16 levels of fighter would give you 8 feats.

Because with a few Scout levels you get Skirmish damage (thanks, Swift Hunter!) and a bunch of skills to work with. Fighters can only shoot. That's lame. They can't even see their targets well (spot isn't a class skill, so you can't see stuff that's more than 200 feet away or so).


I've seen and heard what people say about balance and optimization in D&D for years, but still I don't care about it: PHB only, low- to mid-level campaigns, and adventures that don't revolve about killing things, and I never seen any reasons why the balance between fighers and wizards would need to change.
(I do take away natural spell and free heavy armor for clerics, but that's about it.)

What exactly do your Fighters do in a game that doesn't revolve around killing things? Are you hand waving away their lack of abilities around social skills like Diplomacy and Bluff? Ignoring their generally lower Intelligence, Charisma, and Wisdom while roleplaying?

JaronK

Eldariel
2010-05-24, 05:15 PM
Four levels of fighter is pretty much the maximum you can fight into a build and not have it come back to bite you. Those four levels will give you 3 bonus feats which is great for feat intensive builds like archery or two weapon fighting, but fighter isn't really the focus of the build.

Or to put it more simply, would you call a ranger 16/fighter 4 focused on archery a fighter build or a ranger build?

For Zhentarim Fighter (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060327a), you can make decent use of 9-10 levels, though 10th is mostly a filler. After that, the only somewhat interesting class features you'd get going Fighter forward are Weapon Supremacy (which just costs too much) and Overpowering Attack (which is very similar to what can be acquired with a 1-level dip in Monk, not to mention all that powerful outside specific scenarios).

An exploration in what worthwhile things a Fighter does offer:
- +2 to damage and hit and 20' extra range with one feat [Ranged Weapon Mastery Feat; Player's Handbook II (4 Fighter-levels, +8 BAB, 2 feats)]
- Massive Bull Rush Damage Bonuses + Numerous Fringe Benefits [Dungeoncrasher ACF; Dungeonscape (6 Fighter-levels)]
- ½ BAB to Will-saves as Immediate Action [Resolute ACF; Complete Champion (2 Fighter-levels)]
- Swift Action Intimidation [Zhentarim Fighter Sub Levels; Champions of Valor Web Enhancement (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060327a) (9 Fighter-levels)]
- Dex to Damage vs. Flat-footed and +2 Initiative [Hit'n'Run ACF; Drow of the Underdark (1 Fighter-level)]
- Double Damage on AoOs [Overpowering Attack ACF; Player's Handbook II (16 Fighter-levels)]
- Take 10 on 1 attack, +5 on 1 attack, use weapon in grapple, +4 vs. disarm, +1 AC [Weapon Supremacy Feat; Player's Handbook II (18 Fighter-levels, 5 feats)]

I'm ignoring Sneak Attack Thug Fighter (which is definitely a somewhat respectable Sneak Attacker with some skill dips) and Thug (which makes for some fringe Education/Knowledge Devotion builds) in general here, but I do believe I hit all the major ones.

The key issue should be apparent: You can get good stuff on levels 1, 2, 4, 6 & 9 with some sprinkled bonuses (bonus feats, some small boosts) in the middle-levels. The latter abilities just take too many levels (and in Weapon Supremacy's case, feats) to make it worth taking that many levels in your d10 HD, Full BAB, 2+Int Skills (off a poor list), 1 good save ass.

1 feat every 2 levels just isn't very useful. You want class features for your trouble, especially since every additional feat after a certain crux point for each build gives diminishing returns since you've taken all the truly "worthwhile" feats; Weapon Supremacy is worth 1 feat for many builds, but 6? That's 12 levels (effectively) that give you nothing else.

It's pretty sad how Fighter's "class features" give diminishing benefits over the levels while casters' grow in power exponentially with stronger old spells, new spells and new spell levels.


Eldariel:
That's a TON of material. And a ton of fights. Jesus. How long have they been doing that stuff?

Test of Spite has been going on for over a year now. Penny Dreadfuls likewise. Martial Compendium and company are way, way older and have existed since Tome of Battle was printed in 2006.

Kaiyanwang
2010-05-24, 05:23 PM
Overpowering Attack (which is very similar to what can be acquired with a 1-level dip in Monk, not to mention all that powerful outside specific scenarios).


Slightly off-topic, I wonder if Overpowering Attack isn't made to boost some AOO build (just to say: Ticket of Blade, Defensive Sweep, Robilar's Gambit, Dual Strike, Improved Combat Reflexes).

Strike him for double damage: if moves, does NOT moves, and/or attacks you, 4 attacks at the double of damage.

Feat intensive for TWF I guess..:smallconfused:

Fawsto
2010-05-24, 05:25 PM
The thing with overestimating full BAB goes so far that clerics (and other full-casting diviners) have a mid level spell that GIVES them full BAB for free. The name is Divine Power and it is core.

Full BAB plus goddamm spells. And they think a Paladin can keep up with smiting... Meh.

ToB helps a bit, but turns fighters, paladins and monks into secondary dip-friendly classes. There is no reason to take them past level 6, but while creating a martial adept, a few dips can give you nice stuff (feats, bonus saves, imunity to fear effects...).

It pains me a little, since I am a devoted fan to the concept of the paladin. Until I met these boards I always played one. Here I realized that I could bring a Cleric and really wield the might to use a paladin concept.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-24, 05:43 PM
Inteligent monster would could easily have details on how hard it is to kill a cleric vs. a palaldin/fighter, how good each is at defense and offense.

Classes are metagame. You see a person in heavy armour with a holy symbol lay hands on someone and lo, the wounds close with uncanny swiftness. They might be a cleric. They might be a paladin. They might even by be a bard proficient in heavy armour and religiously devout, or a fighter who took a level in cleric. The latter happened in a campaign I am playing right now.

Well, Holy Word is pretty darn good. I'd prepare it if I was a cleric, I think.
Yes, but only a priestly creature, a servant of a deity, or one who has dedicated themselves to fighting such, would know of the mysteries of the servants of the gods, what spells and incantation are available to them if they call upon the god.
Again, metagaming.

Eldariel
2010-05-24, 05:47 PM
Slightly off-topic, I guess if Overpowering Attack isn't made to boost some AOO build (just to say: Ticket of Blade, Defensive Sweep, Robilar's Gambit, Dual Strike, Improved Combat Reflexes).

Strike him for double damage: if moves, does NOT moves, and/or attacks you, 4 attacks at the double of damage.

Feat intensive for TWF I guess..:smallconfused:

Overpowering Attack is indeed quite useful for AoO builds indeed, or mixes (when building theoretical Fighter 20s, I make sure to include the Intimidator-capability, the AoO (&) Controller (Trip/Bull Rush/Standstill) capability and the Charger-capability along with somewhat expanded skill list); when you expect to get as many (or more) attacks out-of-turn than during your turn, it becomes fine.

Even on level 20, you only get 5 attacks per turn (Haste) normally and even just Defensive Sweep guarantees two at double damage with Overpowering Attack, which is respectable since they're at full BAB, but generally you'll get far more. Just...then there's the issue of actually getting Overpowering Attack which costs way more dead levels than the ability is worth.

Boci
2010-05-24, 05:49 PM
Classes are metagame. You see a person in heavy armour with a holy symbol lay hands on someone and lo, the wounds close with uncanny swiftness. They might be a cleric. They might be a paladin. They might even by be a bard proficient in heavy armour and religiously devout, or a fighter who took a level in cleric. The latter happened in a campaign I am playing right now.

Aura and special mount are going to indicate they are the weaker variety. Numerous high level magical auras indicate danger, ect.


Yes, but only a priestly creature, a servant of a deity, or one who has dedicated themselves to fighting such, would know of the mysteries of the servants of the gods, what spells and incantation are available to them if they call upon the god.
Again, metagaming.

I don't think its a stretch to assume that inteligent evil creatures know that holy word is not determined by chance but by a comparison of their pure essence against the casters magical potency.

Kaiyanwang
2010-05-24, 05:50 PM
which costs way more dead levels than the ability is worth.

Yeah, this is the point sadly :smallfrown:

I really love the fighter and the way you can combine feats with combos, but dead levels are really annoying.

Gnaeus
2010-05-24, 05:51 PM
Take, for example, Fly. This spell is accessible at 5th level. What can a Fighter do against Fly? Nothing. What can a Paladin do against Fly? Nothing, unless his mount flies.

Actually, there is a paladin spell that gives his mount flight. Spell Compendium, 3rd or 4th level IIRC. Yes, he gets it way too late, but he could always buy a wand or a scroll of it for emergencies, which is more than the fighter or monk can do.

A well built paladin with proper splats and enough foreknowledge to pick the right spells for the day can get around a lot of these problems (which is why I personally regard the class as better than Knight, for example). But on his best day a well optimized paladin isn't the equal of a cleric who sort of knows what he is doing.

Dr.Epic
2010-05-24, 05:57 PM
Here's an illustration for you:

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e119/aivanther/motivator9cdd8bd7ca1ac0da22c7f17606.jpg

Essentially, it can be broken down this way: Monk is a Tier 5 class. Like Mr. Satan/Hercule, a monk can kick a commoner's butt. Yet, he's in a world where people can destroy worlds, and hence is a gnat. To run with the big boys (dragons, demons, druids, etc) you have to be a bit more than able to beat the weak people up.

Save that for the D&D Motivational Poster thread.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-24, 06:00 PM
Aura and special mount are going to indicate they are the weaker variety. Numerous high level magical auras indicate danger, ect.

Even assuming they can detect it, which only a fellow cleric paladin, or blackguard. a creature with a specific and very costly or custom magic item, or a creature with the supernatural or spell like ability to do so, could do, a paladin and clerics aura are equivalent. And who says a cleric can't have a mount? And unless they see the paladin summon it or kill it, they have no way of knowing it's a special mount.


I don't think its a stretch to assume that inteligent evil creatures know that holy word is not determined by chance but by a comparison of their pure essence against the casters magical potency.
That's assuming they have encountered it before or have the resources to look it up. That's assuming they had the skill and knowledge to discern one spell from another.

Boci
2010-05-24, 06:09 PM
And who says a cleric can't have a mount?

Compare them and see which 1 looks more powerful, then attack the rider of the other one.


And unless they see the paladin summon it or kill it, they have no way of knowing it's a special mount.

Some DMs feel the extra hitdie, speed, inteligence and abilities has a visual affect as well.


That's assuming they have encountered it before or have the resources to look it up. That's assuming they had the skill and knowledge to discern one spell from another.

I assume every inteligent monster has heard of the 1 in 20 rule, i.e. no matter how powerful a spell and how week the target, the minimum survival rate is 5%. I imagine that holy word has been cast enough times to know that it is an exception, there any inteligent monster should know that there is a spell that will bypass their usual defenses against the more dangerous spells that can main/kill them from a single casting.

Kaiyanwang
2010-05-24, 06:15 PM
Fireball/any area attack you have it. If it survives, its a paladin. And its a decent tactic to start a battle with anyway, assuming you have access to such magic.


Boci, you raised valid points, but use a blast spell instead of an enemy splitting one does not seems to me a great way to open a battle..

TheThan
2010-05-24, 06:18 PM
Base attack bonus, saving throws, skill points and hit dice are something that ALL classes get. Some get them at better rates than others, but its something that all classes share so I hardly count them as a class specific class feature.

There are feats that play off them, like power attack. But they aren’t class features either, as anyone can get them if they meet those requirements. Sure there is hardly any reason for a wizard to take power attack but the option still exists.



I'm not saying the gap is smaller. The gap is huge; there's no denying that. What I am saying is that the gap might not necessarily appear in the actual game to the extent described on the forums. So you shouldn't worry about it so much in advance; fix the problems when they appear.

This is a very true statement. Not every game is going to have the same party make up or the same outcome. Not everyone is going to be optimizing to get the most power out of their chosen class(es). All this is very dependent on what’s available to the players/dm and who those people are.

Boci
2010-05-24, 06:20 PM
Boci, you raised valid points, but use a blast spell instead of an enemy splitting one does not seems to me a great way to open a battle..

Fair point.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-24, 06:22 PM
Fireball/any area attack you have it. If it survives, its a paladin. And its a decent tactic to start a battle with anyway, assuming you have access to such magic.

Or a cleric with Wild Cohort. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20031118a)
And you're right, that's assuming.



Some DMs feel the extra hitdie, speed, inteligence and abilities has a visual affect as well.

Extra intelligence may just mean the awaken spell. Speed? There is magic items that do that. Hit dice? I already mentioned a feat that will give the same thing. But hey, if a DM feels they have a visual effect, if your paladin mount is Sparkle the Wonder Pony, then far be it from me to gainsay that.




I assume every inteligent monster has heard of the 20 in 1 rule, i.e. no matter how powerful a spell and how week the target, the minimum survival rate is 5%. I imagine that holy word has been cast enough times to know that it is an exception, there any inteligent monster should know that there is a spell that will bypass their usual defenses against the more dangerous spells that can main/kill them from a single casting.
Depending on the monster, that might be a fair assumption. On the other hand, it might not,depending on how common magic is in that world.

Boci
2010-05-24, 06:31 PM
Extra intelligence may just mean the awaken spell. Speed? There is magic items that do that. Hit dice? I already mentioned a feat that will give the same thing.

Okay, so you either facing a paladin or someone who has invested non-neglegable resources into a mount. The safe bet is its the former, and well done on player ingenuity if it turns out to be the latter.


But hey, if a DM feels they have a visual effect, if your paladin mount is Sparkle the Wonder Pony, then far be it from me to gainsay that.

So as a DM the paladins mount would be the same visually as your average warhorse?

Higher BAB and hitpoints are another thing that might give the paladin away, if one assumes that they have the visual affect of making the paladin look physically more beefier, then again you may have flavoured your paladin to have wipcord muscle and thus the cleric looks stronger.

I'm just saying, having the monster attack the cleric over the paladin is not automatically metagaming. It could just ne a smart monster against a party who did not think to hide thier roles.


Depending on the monster, that might be a fair assumption. On the other hand, it might not,depending on how common magic is in that world.

If you can get a casting of a seventh level spell in a large city, I'd say holy word is going to be well known.

Faleldir
2010-05-24, 06:41 PM
How in hells does a baddie know the "healer" has Holy Word prepared? For that matter, how do they know the AC and HP? That is DM metagaming.:smallmad:
I'm sorry, I realized this independently and went back to change it, but you had already replied.

You see an enemy "tank" and "healer". Assuming you can't tell them apart at all, you have a 50% chance of picking the more powerful one. If you attack the "healer" first, the "tank" can't do anything to stop you. The only way he's going to protect anyone is by exploiting your ignorance, which makes him little more than a decoy, a glorified hireling. His job could be done by ONE of the "healer"'s summoning spells.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-24, 07:41 PM
Okay, so you either facing a paladin or someone who has invested non-neglegable resources into a mount. The safe bet is its the former, and well done on player ingenuity if it turns out to be the latter.

I am willing to admit this is the case, as long as the creature has a reason to be knowledgeable on the ways of holy warriors.Successful Knowledge: Religion check would do it.


So as a DM the paladins mount would be the same visually as your average warhorse?
Not an average, but nothing spectacular beyond excellent vigour and health. I don't personally imagine them sparkling or glowing or anything like that.


Higher BAB and hitpoints are another thing that might give the paladin away, if one assumes that they have the visual affect of making the paladin look physically more beefier, then again you may have flavoured your paladin to have wipcord muscle and thus the cleric looks stronger.
Hit points is generally thought of as an abstraction, someone with higher hit points is probably better at taking hits in a way that doesn't hurt as much, twisting to the right so it's only a scratch rather then a sword through the gut. BAB is skill, aiming, recovering, not over extending yourself and losing balance, piercing defences, all abstracted.


I'm just saying, having the monster attack the cleric over the paladin is not automatically metagaming. It could just ne a smart monster against a party who did not think to hide thier roles.
I agree it could. And most parties are pretty careless about this. But it isn't the default, in my view.




If you can get a casting of a seventh level spell in a large city, I'd say holy word is going to be well known.
How often is Holy Word going to be cast by a for sell spell caster? It has no utility value, and city spell casters by default have their customers go to them. And large cities are fairly rare. Only metropolises are bigger, which refers to places like Rome. Finally, most creatures players face are rather out in the boonies. Not exactly aware of the wonders of civilisation.

The Glyphstone
2010-05-24, 07:44 PM
Impressive, we managed to get the weekly Monk thread, ToB thread, and Wizards thread all in one dose.

*Gates in a Popcorn elemental*

Ravens_cry
2010-05-24, 07:49 PM
Impressive, we managed to get the weekly Monk thread, ToB thread, and Wizards thread all in one dose.

*Gates in a Popcorn elemental*
Wizards.
" Now they retreat into a cloud of smoke and congratulate each other on being masters of the universe."

Boci
2010-05-24, 08:04 PM
Hit points is generally thought of as an abstraction, someone with higher hit points is probably better at taking hits in a way that doesn't hurt as much, twisting to the right so it's only a scratch rather then a sword through the gut. BAB is skill, aiming, recovering, not over extending yourself and losing balance, piercing defences, all abstracted.

Not necissarily, as a PC I do not think it unreasonable to have a better than 50% chance to tell clerics and paladins apart based on which looks tougher/muscular, so it could exstend to a monster.


How often is Holy Word going to be cast by a for sell spell caster? It has no utility value, and city spell casters by default have their customers go to them. And large cities are fairly rare. Only metropolises are bigger, which refers to places like Rome. Finally, most creatures players face are rather out in the boonies. Not exactly aware of the wonders of civilisation.

I'm just saying if a casting of the spell can be purchased in any large city, the fact that it can end your life without a saving throw should be common knowledge against those its designed to kill.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 09:33 PM
Impressive, we managed to get the weekly Monk thread, ToB thread, and Wizards thread all in one dose.

*Gates in a Popcorn elemental*

I's ever a slave to your convenience, desu. I's wondering iffen we can get this stickied. After a few more searches, I found out just how common these discussions were.

InkEyes
2010-05-24, 10:22 PM
I's ever a slave to your convenience, desu. I's wondering iffen we can get this stickied. After a few more searches, I found out just how common these discussions were.

If it makes you feel better the paladin mount/wild cohort/regular horse thing is new. It's very tangential and irrelevant, but you take what you can get. Lord only knows why we don't have a sticky on class powers yet. I guess one of the three not-dead mods fears having to lock and sticky a new thread every week or so when the discussion hits 50 pages. Or maybe it'd cause frequent flamewars too? :smallconfused:

The Glyphstone
2010-05-24, 10:45 PM
I's ever a slave to your convenience, desu. I's wondering iffen we can get this stickied. After a few more searches, I found out just how common these discussions were.

Eh, don't feel bad. If not you, someone else. Want some popcorn? :)

The Cat Goddess
2010-05-24, 11:01 PM
Easiest way to "limit" a Wizard is to simply limit his exposure to spells outside of those gained automatically by leveling up.

This makes a Wizard little better than a Sorcerer by spells available, and worse by spells per day.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 11:03 PM
Easiest way to "limit" a Wizard is to simply limit his exposure to spells outside of those gained automatically by leveling up.

This makes a Wizard little better than a Sorcerer by spells available, and worse by spells per day.

Sorcerer's not exactly weak, from what I've been hearing.....

The Cat Goddess
2010-05-24, 11:21 PM
Sorcerer's not exactly weak, from what I've been hearing.....

True... but a Wizard with limited spell selection is Tier-2 at best.

The Glyphstone
2010-05-24, 11:27 PM
True... but a Wizard with limited spell selection is Tier-2 at best.

Even then, there's a few ways to increase the level-up additions - Collegiate Wizard, i think Elven Generalist, and maybe one or two more. You have to also ban those to really turn Wizards into weaker Sorcerers.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-24, 11:36 PM
Even then, there's a few ways to increase the level-up additions - Collegiate Wizard, i think Elven Generalist, and maybe one or two more. You have to also ban those to really turn Wizards into weaker Sorcerers.

Why not just make sorcerer int based at that point, and call it a day?

DeMouse
2010-05-24, 11:40 PM
in 4e however monks rip the **** into multiple pieces then soak them in acid and nuke them.

in my first ever 4e campaign and am playing monk

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-25, 12:14 AM
Just found Tashalatora. This... I....

How did they justify not rolling out errata? Or a reprint? Or a Essentials book?
To me, Tash is so appalling not because it breaks the game, but because it demonstrates that someone understood and wanted to fix things. Worse, that they were very clever, and able to do so very elegantly.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-25, 12:33 AM
Just found Tashalatora. This... I....

How did they justify not rolling out errata? Or a reprint? Or a Essentials book?
To me, Tash is so appalling not because it breaks the game, but because it demonstrates that someone understood and wanted to fix things. Worse, that they were very clever, and able to do so very elegantly.
Just be happy that Monk 2/Ardent 18 (or the more obvious but not quite as good PsyWar 18) finally allows Monks to do something meaningful.

Greenish
2010-05-25, 12:36 AM
Just found Tashalatora. This... I....

How did they justify not rolling out errata? Or a reprint? Or a Essentials book?
To me, Tash is so appalling not because it breaks the game, but because it demonstrates that someone understood and wanted to fix things. Worse, that they were very clever, and able to do so very elegantly.Or they just printed out so much stuff that some of it was bound to be decent.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-25, 01:46 AM
Or they just printed out so much stuff that some of it was bound to be decent.

Things don't work that way, in my experience.

Kaiyanwang
2010-05-25, 02:12 AM
Or they just printed out so much stuff that some of it was bound to be decent.

Ockham's Razor.

*activates a ring of telekinesis making a cup levitate*

*Deadly Stroke on the popcorn elemental*

Sliver
2010-05-25, 02:36 AM
Actually, there is a paladin spell that gives his mount flight. Spell Compendium, 3rd or 4th level IIRC. Yes, he gets it way too late, but he could always buy a wand or a scroll of it for emergencies.

It is sometimes mentioned due to paladin spells being lower leveled then their equivalent cleric spells, thus cheaper, but... What actual paladin ever takes scribe scroll or craft wand? Did your paladin ever do it?


Save that for the D&D Motivational Poster thread.

It was promised that the next monk debate ever to come will feature this poster.

What's Tashalatora?

Avilan the Grey
2010-05-25, 02:40 AM
Personally this is the reason why I do not enjoy PnP 3.5E that much. I am a fighter-type person, maybe with some multiclassing.
I hate feeling useless at higher levels because the only thing I am good at is being a meatshield, but on the other hand I rather be useless than to play a casting class, which I just hate playing, period.

Quite frankly it boils down to one thing: crappy design. I would love to try 4E, which seems properly balanced.

Kaiyanwang
2010-05-25, 02:47 AM
Personally this is the reason why I do not enjoy PnP 3.5E that much. I am a fighter-type person, maybe with some multiclassing.
I hate feeling useless at higher levels because the only thing I am good at is being a meatshield, but on the other hand I rather be useless than to play a casting class, which I just hate playing, period.

Quite frankly it boils down to one thing: crappy design. I would love to try 4E, which seems properly balanced.

It heavily depends from your group playstyle. I never had problems like this with my players.

I prefer 3.5 by far because I see it as an huge toolbox able to built with any character concept and world.

Simply, I take what is useful for the fun and i get rid of the gamebreakers.

There are things that 4th edition simply can't do. It's ok for a gamestyle, but that's all.

Now I'm going to start a proper, long term campaign with Pathfinder. They changed enough to improve the game and I want to support it. 3rd edition must go on!

Greenish
2010-05-25, 02:58 AM
What's Tashalatora?It's a multiclassing feat from Secrets of Sarlona for monk/psionic class. Basically, you take it and your psionic class will advance monk's unarmed strikes.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 04:07 AM
Not necissarily, as a PC I do not think it unreasonable to have a better than 50% chance to tell clerics and paladins apart based on which looks tougher/muscular, so it could exstend to a monster.

I think it is. A half-orc cleric and a halfling paladin are equally possible, yet would defy which is the more muscular.



I'm just saying if a casting of the spell can be purchased in any large city, the fact that it can end your life without a saving throw should be common knowledge against those its designed to kill.
What if a mundane Fighter started spouting off about spells and what they did and using the knowledge in game? Would that not also feel like meta-gaming? Why then would a troll know of such things, or even a typical frost giant?

JaronK
2010-05-25, 04:10 AM
I've never had trouble differentiating Clerics from Paladins. Paladins always use martial weapons, Clerics rarely do. Paladins almost always have a mount, Clerics rarely do. NPC Paladins often have a sword and heavy shield or lance and heavy shield, but Clerics can't cast with a one handed weapon and heavy shield so they don't use that set up. End result? Usually, you can tell.

JaronK

Prodan
2010-05-25, 04:11 AM
It is sometimes mentioned due to paladin spells being lower leveled then their equivalent cleric spells, thus cheaper, but... What actual paladin ever takes scribe scroll or craft wand? Did your paladin ever do it?
Gnome artificers at work.

JaronK
2010-05-25, 04:33 AM
More to the point, an Archivist can use his scribe scroll to make a scroll if a Paladin (who doesn't need the feat) casts the spell for him.

JaronK

Kaiyanwang
2010-05-25, 04:52 AM
I've never had trouble differentiating Clerics from Paladins. Paladins always use martial weapons, Clerics rarely do. Paladins almost always have a mount, Clerics rarely do. NPC Paladins often have a sword and heavy shield or lance and heavy shield, but Clerics can't cast with a one handed weapon and heavy shield so they don't use that set up. End result? Usually, you can tell.

JaronK

Paladins can be charging smite variant. Actually, In my setting they are the mayority. Guess why.

Clerics could have the war domain. A weapon Proficency feat (just for a 18-20 crit weapon). A player of mine did this because of a middle east flavoured character (scimitar). Or take the somatic weaponry feat.

Boci
2010-05-25, 06:36 AM
I think it is. A half-orc cleric and a halfling paladin are equally possible, yet would defy which is the more muscular.

But even then, if we have a half ork and a paladin in the same party who have equal strength, well guess who is most likely to be the paladin?


What if a mundane Fighter started spouting off about spells and what they did and using the knowledge in game? Would that not also feel like meta-gaming? Why then would a troll know of such things, or even a typical frost giant?

"Fireball is an area affect that burns. Those who are quick of reflex can reduce and sometimes even negate the damage"

"Holy word is a powerful spell that targets all creatures who oppose thje casters cause. It bypasses conventional defenses of the body and mind, as evident by its exception to the 1 in 20 rule"

I do not think a fighter who knows that is metagaming, unless the setting is low magic.

Oslecamo
2010-05-25, 07:01 AM
It is sometimes mentioned due to paladin spells being lower leveled then their equivalent cleric spells, thus cheaper, but... What actual paladin ever takes scribe scroll or craft wand? Did your paladin ever do it?


Well, no, but spell compendium and complete divine do add a lot of paladin-only very nice spells that make it perfectly able to go toe to toe with ToB.

Gnaeus
2010-05-25, 09:25 AM
It is sometimes mentioned due to paladin spells being lower leveled then their equivalent cleric spells, thus cheaper, but... What actual paladin ever takes scribe scroll or craft wand? Did your paladin ever do it?


As JaronK points out, the paladin doesn't have to take the feat. An old paladin, (or one who was once in a party with tier ones who just don't want him around eating their XP anymore) can go to any temple of his god and Lawful Goodly burn off all his XP making wands and scrolls with the aid of a cleric with one of the appropriate feats. I do not believe that any archivist should have their pick of the paladin spell list without demonstrating his devotion to the higher planes, but a paladin should be able to go to his temple and get access to his spell completion/trigger items. If anything, he might get a discount.


Just be happy that Monk 2/Ardent 18 (or the more obvious but not quite as good PsyWar 18) finally allows Monks to do something meaningful.

Monks could always do something meaningful. Monk 1/Druid 19 certainly beats the psiwar build and probably the Ardent (I don't have a lot of experience with Ardents).


Well, no, but spell compendium and complete divine do add a lot of paladin-only very nice spells that make it perfectly able to go toe to toe with ToB.

Not certain I'd go that far, but they totally put it above its rivals in tier 5. Heck, Complete Champion has some awesome stuff for paladin (Battle Blessing, Devotion Feats) that would be much more noted if it didn't have even more awesome stuff for clerics, thereby widening the gap further.

Optimystik
2010-05-25, 09:31 AM
Now I'm going to start a proper, long term campaign with Pathfinder. They changed enough to improve the game and I want to support it. 3rd edition must go on!

Until PF gets Psionics (and NOT the Vancian crap they were considering before!) it will get very little love from me.


Well, no, but spell compendium and complete divine do add a lot of paladin-only very nice spells that make it perfectly able to go toe to toe with ToB.

And Complete Champion adds the wonderful Battle Blessing feat, which is basically free autoquicken for paladin spells.

Kaiyanwang
2010-05-25, 09:40 AM
Until PF gets Psionics (and NOT the Vancian crap they were considering before!) it will get very little love from me.


Fair point. Authors don't seem so fond in psionics, if you want to know what I think about.

But.. psionics is srd and people continue to complain (in right) of their lack in PF. So I hope that in the future they will come. And yes, I agree with you: I like them as they are in 3.5, hands down. Otherwise it makes no sense.

I dont' start with compatibility between SRD and PRD - it would needsanother thread alone I guess.

BTW, you can fit psionics in any game world: sci-fi apart, I remember how nicely they were indian-like flavoured in Mahasarpa, my beloved OAdv WE (featuring Wind Dukes too!).

Lycanthromancer
2010-05-25, 09:43 AM
I'd rather not have it in Pathfinder, as they've been talking about turning it into a spell-slot system (BURN IT WITH FIRE!). I don't play Pathfinder, but I have friends who use Pathfinder stuff if it's been updated, and I don't want anything to do with slotted psionics (blech).

Doug Lampert
2010-05-25, 02:34 PM
It is sometimes mentioned due to paladin spells being lower leveled then their equivalent cleric spells, thus cheaper, but... What actual paladin ever takes scribe scroll or craft wand? Did your paladin ever do it?

Who cares? Spell prerequisites can be provided by someone other than the character making the item, so wands and scrolls of paladin spells are made by the wizard or allied cleric with the paladin providing the spell access.

Optimystik
2010-05-25, 02:58 PM
Who cares? Spell prerequisites can be provided by someone other than the character making the item, so wands and scrolls of paladin spells are made by the wizard or allied cleric with the paladin providing the spell access.

Also, Warlocks can cherry pick from any class list when crafting, so you don't even need the paladin.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 03:34 PM
But even then, if we have a half ork and a paladin in the same party who have equal strength, well guess who is most likely to be the paladin?

That's, again, meta knowledge. A half orc may not be as effective a paladin in many ways, on average lacking the personal magnetism of some other races, on average. But who chooses and who is chosen is a different matter.



"Fireball is an area affect that burns. Those who are quick of reflex can reduce and sometimes even negate the damage"

"Holy word is a powerful spell that targets all creatures who oppose thje casters cause. It bypasses conventional defenses of the body and mind, as evident by its exception to the 1 in 20 rule"

I do not think a fighter who knows that is metagaming, unless the setting is low magic.
The 1 in 20 rule is an abstraction. And even if it isn't, is a fighter going to be affected enough to formulate such 'rules'? You might be taught something like this at a fighter collage, as shown in OotS, but that isn't going to be available to the 'Monster on the Street'. Besides, most fighter types are not going to be very good at telling one spell from another.
And they still have no certain way of knowing a paladin from a cleric fro certain, or even a multiclass fighter or devout bard if they don't have a means of detecting alignment, except with time.

Boci
2010-05-25, 03:49 PM
That's, again, meta knowledge.

So its automatically metagaming for a monster to go:
I see two adventurers infront of me. Both figures seem to have a hightened connection to their diety. The most common exsplanation for this is a holy warrior or a devine magician of the diety. Divine magicians are significantly more dangerous due to the numberous spells avaialble to them.
One is a halfling and the other is a halforc. Halforc are usually far stronger than halflings, but these two appear to be of equal strengths. There for the most likely explanation is that the halgling is the holy warrior and the half-ork the divine magician, so the latter probably posses the greater threat to me.


The 1 in 20 rule is an abstraction.

No it is most certainly not. It is observable in game.


And even if it isn't, is a fighter going to be affected enough to formulate such 'rules'?

The 1 in 20 rule would be common knowledge, just like the fact that high level spell casters can cover vast distances in ta matter of second.



You might be taught something like this at a fighter collage, as shown in OotS, but that isn't going to be available to the 'Monster on the Street'. Besides, most fighter types are not going to be very good at telling one spell from another.

Hey, stop that. I was entertaining your counter point of would I accept a fighter having such knowledge of spells.


What if a mundane Fighter started spouting off about spells and what they did and using the knowledge in game?
Was your exact question.

My origional example was an inteligent evil monster.

The Glyphstone
2010-05-25, 03:59 PM
So its automatically metagaming for a monster to go:
I see two adventurers infront of me. Both figures seem to have a hightened connection to their diety. The most common exsplanation for this is a holy warrior or a devine magician of the diety. Divine magicians are significantly more dangerous due to the numberous spells avaialble to them.
One is a halfling and the other is a halforc. Halforc are usually far stronger than halflings, but these two appear to be of equal strengths. There for the most likely explanation is that the halgling is the holy warrior and the half-ork the divine magician, so the latter probably posses the greater threat to me.


If neither of them have cast a spell, how can you be certain they have a 'heightened connection to their deity' of any sort, and not just highly religious fighters?

Strength isn't necessarily a physically observable attribute, though it can be. It's just an abstraction of how hard you hit and how much you can carry, which could be martial training and practice as much as big, bulging muscles.

You can probably justify a lot of game mechanics by inventing in-game explanations for them, but stuff like this '1 in 20 rule' are pushing it. Unless you're playing OOTS-verse, it's doubtful that someone decided to catalogue and categorize the results of thousands and thousands of cast spells to determine that exactly 5% of all targets for most spells seem to be less or unaffected by it. It'd be like having it as 'common knowledge' that a trainee warrior who manages to defeat 7 orcs in single combat will be capable of hitting his target in sparring practice 5% more often than someone who has only killed 6 orcs....game stats and dice rolls are an abstraction, not something codified and studied in the average campaign setting.

Boci
2010-05-25, 04:08 PM
If neither of them have cast a spell, how can you be certain they have a 'heightened connection to their deity' of any sort, and not just highly religious fighters?

Does not make any difference. The point is avoiding the paladins and religious fighters and going for the full casters.


Strength isn't necessarily a physically observable attribute, though it can be. It's just an abstraction of how hard you hit and how much you can carry, which could be martial training and practice as much as big, bulging muscles.

I already acknowled that. I'm just saying usually you expect strength to have some sort of physical tell.


You can probably justify a lot of game mechanics by inventing in-game explanations for them, but stuff like this '1 in 20 rule' are pushing it. Unless you're playing OOTS-verse, it's doubtful that someone decided to catalogue and categorize the results of thousands and thousands of cast spells to determine that exactly 5% of all targets for most spells seem to be less or unaffected by it.

Different opinions. I assume magic has been catalogued by wizards and basic rules are common knowledge. I find it hard to imagine no ones realized the significance of commoners on rare occasions surviving high level spells when they are included in the target area.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 04:16 PM
So its automatically metagaming for a monster to go:
I see two adventurers infront of me. Both figures seem to have a hightened connection to their diety. The most common exsplanation for this is a holy warrior or a devine magician of the diety. Divine magicians are significantly more dangerous due to the numberous spells avaialble to them.
One is a halfling and the other is a halforc. Halforc are usually far stronger than halflings, but these two appear to be of equal strengths. There for the most likely explanation is that the halgling is the holy warrior and the half-ork the divine magician, so the latter probably posses the greater threat to me.
Depending on the monster, they won't even know they have a heightened connection to a deity. We already went over that.




No it is most certainly not. It is observable in game.
Take a coin. Flip it 6 times. It will be pretty unlikely that comes up 3 times each side
I did it, and all 6 times it came up tails. Your results will likely differ.
As the sample size increases, the odds catch up, but who is going to be subjected to spells enough times to formulate these rules independently. They will be more likely thinking 'Oh man, that was awful. I sure was lucky that I dodged out of the way somehow/ didn't have my brain fried/ etc. . .'


The 1 in 20 rule would be common knowledge, just like the fact that high level spell casters can cover vast distances in ta matter of second.
Depending on how common high level magic users are, the latter will be legends. And even if it is common knowledge, unless you are trained or talented in the arts of magic yourself, how does one tell the difference, at casting, between dimension door, teleport, greater teleport, invisibility, and greater invisibility? All make a magic user appear not there anymore.

Hey, stop that. I was entertaining your counter point of would I accept a fighter having such knowledge of spells.
My origional example was an inteligent evil monster.
Not all intelligent monsters are magic users. Many have special abilities innate, but are otherwise mundane.

The Glyphstone
2010-05-25, 04:17 PM
Does not make any difference. The point is avoiding the paladins and religious fighters and going for the full casters.

Precisely...and how can you tell a full caster apart from a religious fighter until he actually casts magic? Even then, without spellcraft all you've done is narrowed it down to 'paladin or cleric' and ruled out fighter.





Different opinions. I assume magic has been catalogued by wizards and basic rules are common knowledge. I find it hard to imagine no ones realized the significance of commoners on rare occasions surviving high level spells when they are included in the target area.

I'm sure people have noticed that on rare occasions, otherwise unremarkable people can survive high-level spell attacks. What I find it hard to imagine is that the phenomenon has been studied so extensively that they've managed to narrow the effect down to precisely 5% of all affected targets, regardless of how powerful or weak they are, and regardless of any terrain, ambient conditions, phases of the moon, or who knows what else might affect magical energies. Maybe I just like my magic more magical, though, and less scholarly/scientific - though that makes it a bit ironic that Ebberon is my favorite campaign setting.:smallsigh:

Boci
2010-05-25, 04:40 PM
Depending on the monster, they won't even know they have a heightened connection to a deity. We already went over that.

Yes. Didn't you say most parties are careless in this aspect? I know I said well done to the players if they trick the monster into attacking the wrong PC based on appearance. Few think of that though in my expirience.


Take a coin. Flip it 6 times. It will be pretty unlikely that comes up 3 times each side
I did it, and all 6 times it came up tails. Your results will likely differ.
As the sample size increases, the odds catch up, but who is going to be subjected to spells enough times to formulate these rules independently. They will be more likely thinking 'Oh man, that was awful. I sure was lucky that I dodged out of the way somehow/ didn't have my brain fried/ etc. . .'

The commoner? Sure. The wizard? Might look a bit more deeply into the incident.


Depending on how common high level magic users are, the latter will be legends. And even if it is common knowledge, unless you are trained or talented in the arts of magic yourself, how does one tell the difference, at casting, between dimension door, teleport, greater teleport, invisibility, and greater invisibility? All make a magic user appear not there anymore.

Irrelevant. I have never argued that you can recognize spells without spellcraft ranks, just that you can know of the spells existence.


Not all intelligent monsters are magic users. Many have special abilities innate, but are otherwise mundane.

No, but most of what I have been describing doesn't realy on the observer being a spell caster.


Precisely...and how can you tell a full caster apart from a religious fighter until he actually casts magic? Even then, without spellcraft all you've done is narrowed it down to 'paladin or cleric' and ruled out fighter.

Identify with is more handy with a weapon and attack the other. Larger muscles, more heavily set ect should indicate a paladin/religious fighter. I'm not arguing that its a fool proof method, just that smart monsters can do better than guess blindly.


I'm sure people have noticed that on rare occasions, otherwise unremarkable people can survive high-level spell attacks. What I find it hard to imagine is that the phenomenon has been studied so extensively that they've managed to narrow the effect down to precisely 5% of all affected targets, regardless of how powerful or weak they are, and regardless of any terrain, ambient conditions, phases of the moon, or who knows what else might affect magical energies. Maybe I just like my magic more magical, though, and less scholarly/scientific - though that makes it a bit ironic that Ebberon is my favorite campaign setting.:smallsigh:

This pretty much. I take the scientific aproach to most things, since I assume that its the aproach of smost inteligent societies: quantify, define, understand.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-25, 04:51 PM
You have a gaggle of nerds with extremely high Ints playing with the same set of tools for hundreds of years. It seems reasonable to me that they might jot down something as interesting as the fact that most spells seem to have an inexplicably static minimum survival rate, taken in the larger scale.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-25, 04:52 PM
You have a gaggle of nerds with extremely high Ints playing with the same set of tools for hundreds of years. It seems reasonable to me that they might jot down something as interesting as the fact that most spells seem to have an inexplicably static minimum survival rate, taken in the larger scale.
To be fair, we have that in the real world, too, and there's a lot we don't know, and most of what we think we know, we've only learned in the last 200 years.

Boci
2010-05-25, 04:53 PM
To be fair, we have that in the real world, too, and there's a lot we don't know, and most of what we think we know, we've only learned in the last 200 years.

True, but we lack spells and for the 1 in 20 rule there is only observation. I am sure the explanation is far less simple, if one even exists (and I am sure a lot more than just one are floating around).

Godskook
2010-05-25, 04:56 PM
Does not make any difference. The point is avoiding the paladins and religious fighters and going for the full casters.

Sorcadin.

Your move.

AstralFire
2010-05-25, 05:01 PM
No one else has said it, so I will-

Congrats on being a newbie to the game/boards who is very intelligent and receptive, Bitter Iocus. :smallsmile:


Sorcadin.

Your move.

Looks like it's time to duel. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHxO4fLjgwE)

tyckspoon
2010-05-25, 05:03 PM
To be fair, we have that in the real world, too, and there's a lot we don't know, and most of what we think we know, we've only learned in the last 200 years.

Real-world rules appear to be much, much more inscrutable than D&D- quantum physics is a much trickier subject than detecting the effect of a universal RNG that only contains 20 possible results, 2 of which have interesting and somewhat absurd effects on many major activities.

Oslecamo
2010-05-25, 05:11 PM
Real-world rules appear to be much, much more inscrutable than D&D- quantum physics is a much trickier subject than detecting the effect of a universal RNG that only contains 20 possible results, 2 of which have interesting and somewhat absurd effects on many major activities.

Well, to be fair, only saves and attacks are subject to critical sucesses and failures. Skills don't follow that rules so a 20 on diplomacy won't convince the king to give you the kingdom for free neither a 1 on concentration when you got a +30 modifier will fail.

Boci
2010-05-25, 05:12 PM
Sorcadin.

Your move.

From what I can tell you are refering to a famous gish build, with would make judging the role in the party difficult. But I've already acknowledged the tactics I describe are not fool proof.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 05:12 PM
Yes. Didn't you say most parties are careless in this aspect? I know I said well done to the players if they trick the monster into attacking the wrong PC based on appearance. Few think of that though in my expirience.

I am willing to admit it is something that doesn't come up much in game. It's not so much tricking the monster as parties vary.




The commoner? Sure. The wizard? Might look a bit more deeply into the incident.
I thought you said the creatute doesn't have to be a spellcaster to tell.




Irrelevant. I have never argued that you can recognize spells without spellcraft ranks, just that you can know of the spells existence.

You probably heard there are powerful priests who can kill with a word and even deafen those as powerful as they but unless you are trained yourself, I don't see you knowing many more details then that if you are a mundane monster, growing up in the wild mountains, occasionally attacking a caravan, or living out your life in some forgotten ruins of an ancient catacombs, even if you are canny and artful.




No, but most of what I have been describing doesn't realy on the observer being a spell caster.
This is where we disagree. Just telling the difference between the cleric and the devout bard requires magical means.



Identify with is more handy with a weapon and attack the other. Larger muscles, more heavily set ect should indicate a paladin/religious fighter. I'm not arguing that its a fool proof method, just that smart monsters can do better than guess blindly.

But you can only tell skill by actually fighting them or watching your comrades at arms fighting them. Which means soemone has to go get beat.
Whip cord muscles can be just as strong as someone who has trained body builder style.

Boci
2010-05-25, 05:18 PM
I am willing to admit it is something that doesn't come up much in game. It's not so much tricking the monster as parties vary.

I'm not saying monsters should have house style perception skills, just that inteligent monsters should be able to do better than just take a blind guess as to who is the full caster in the party.


I thought you said the creatute doesn't have to be a spellcaster to tell.

I could not conduct a test to find an atom but I know they exist because someone else did all the work for me.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-25, 05:41 PM
Real-world rules appear to be much, much more inscrutable than D&D- quantum physics is a much trickier subject than detecting the effect of a universal RNG that only contains 20 possible results, 2 of which have interesting and somewhat absurd effects on many major activities.
True, though I prefer to think of the mechanics as a simplified simulation of the game world, not how the world actually would work in reality. For an OotS or Erfworld like game, though, yes, that makes perfect sense.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 05:43 PM
I'm not saying monsters should have house style perception skills, just that inteligent monsters should be able to do better than just take a blind guess as to who is the full caster in the party.

Not a blind guess, , but not enough in my opinion to ignore the man trying to stick a sword in your gut, to try and walk right by him as they take a swipe at you.


I could not conduct a test to find an atom but I know they exist because someone else did all the work for me.
We live in a time of fast and vast information, where we can look up and cross check facts with a speed and skill. I don't think we can compare our situation with theirs. What most monsters would have would be a collection of lore and rumour, describing the time the time a little furfooted critter shot fire from his hands and singed One Eyed Bukel pretty badly. Were they hit by a flaming hands, an embellished fireball, an energy substituted lightning bolt, what? They don't know, but they didn't like it.

Boci
2010-05-25, 05:52 PM
Not a blind guess, , but not enough in my opinion to ignore the man trying to stick a sword in your gut, to try and walk right by him as they take a swipe at you.

Generally, if someone is trying to swipe at you, they are trained in melee combat, meaning there are weaker targets.


We live in a time of fast and vast information, where we can look up and cross check facts with a speed and skill. I don't think we can compare our situation with theirs.

Aside from the internet, what do we have that magic cannot replicate? A high school student would have known about atoms beofre the internet.


What most monsters would have would be a collection of lore and rumour, describing the time the time a little furfooted critter shot fire from his hands and singed One Eyed Bukel pretty badly. Were they hit by a flaming hands, an embellished fireball, an energy substituted lightning bolt, what? They don't know, but they didn't like it.

This just seems to be a difference of opinions. You seem to view monsters as completly different to humans and thus what is normal to us may not be to them. Wen I DM, almost all races that are inteligent enough to have a language will have some sort of society. There can be outcasts, lone wolves or sole surviviers of a normadic clan, but they very rarely live their entire life isolated from inteligent social structures.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 06:23 PM
Generally, if someone is trying to swipe at you, they are trained in melee combat, meaning there are weaker targets.

A cleric can be a melee brute if they want to be. They can still raise havoc with spells. And HP dead is still dead.


Aside from the internet, what do we have that magic cannot replicate? A high school student would have known about atoms before the internet.
The printing press. Public Libraries. Telephones. None of these would likely be available to anyone in the quasi-medieval world most D&D is played in, let alone to most monsters.


This just seems to be a difference of opinions. You seem to view monsters as completly different to humans and thus what is normal to us may not be to them. Wen I DM, almost all races that are inteligent enough to have a language will have some sort of society. There can be outcasts, lone wolves or sole surviviers of a normadic clan, but they very rarely live their entire life isolated from inteligent social structures.
Even a tribe or clan isn't likely going to spending its resources been rigorously scientific about this. Our own species only fairly recently combined science and engineering to create the world you and I enjoy today.

Oslecamo
2010-05-25, 06:31 PM
Even a tribe or clan isn't likely going to spending its resources been rigorously scientific about this. Our own species only fairly recently combined science and engineering to create the world you and I enjoy today.

Questionable. Combination of knowledge with practise is as old as mankind itself. Agriculture and metalworking could only have been discovered by observation, trial and error (read:the scientic method) and they were essential to the first big civilizations. The ancient romans built structures that remain functional today. The chinese developed a lot of advanced stuff that allowed them to be the most advanced civilization on Earth for a good deal of centuries untill one pesky dinasty decided that inovation was bad, at wich point the europeans took over since they kept developing their own stuff.

Our current situation isn't due to people sudenly starting to think and apply(they've been doing that for millenia), but mostly because of the green revolution that made food cheap and abudant. When you need to worry little about food, you get a lot more free time for science and engineering.

Boci
2010-05-25, 06:35 PM
A cleric can be a melee brute if they want to be. They can still raise havoc with spells. And HP dead is still dead.

True, but if someone attacks you and another one casts a spell, which one are you going to attack? You may end up ignoring the DMM persist and attacking the paladin, but its a safe bet.


The printing press. Public Libraries. Telephones. None of these would likely be available to anyone in the quasi-medieval world most D&D is played in, let alone to most monsters.

I like to assume the king will pay his court wizard to occasionally work on improving the knowledge of his subjects.


Even a tribe or clan isn't likely going to spending its resources been rigorously scientific about this. Our own species only fairly recently combined science and engineering to create the world you and I enjoy today.

They do not need to do the research themselves, they just need to have contact with someone who did.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 06:42 PM
Questionable. Combination of knowledge with practise is as old as mankind itself. Agriculture and metalworking could only have been discovered by observation, trial and error (read:the scientic method) and they were essential to the first big civilizations. The ancient romans built structures that remain functional today. The chinese developed a lot of advanced stuff that allowed them to be the most advanced civilization on Earth for a good deal of centuries untill one pesky dinasty decided that inovation was bad, at wich point the europeans took over.

Our current situation isn't due to people sudenly starting to think and apply, but mostly because of the green revolution that made food cheap and abudant. When you need to worry little about food, you get a lot more free time for science and engineering.
The scientific method, of hypothesis and controlled experiment, is relatively new, and as you say, resource intensive. Lets say you want to make fluffier bread. You would need to make a large number of different loaves, adjusting one by one the ingredient ratios and quantities. That's a lot of bread that you may not be able to sell just to find out what is better. Finding out what does what when you are basing this on enemy actions is even harder.

Boci
2010-05-25, 06:44 PM
The scientific method, of hypothesis and controlled experiment, is relatively new, and as you say, resource intensive. Lets say you want to make fluffier bread. You would need to make a large number of different loaves, adjusting one by one the ingredient ratios and quantities. That's a lot of bread that you may not be able to sell just to find out what is better. Finding out what does what when you are basing this on enemy actions is even harder.

100 rats, cast area affect save or die.

Koury
2010-05-25, 06:48 PM
100 rats, cast area affect save or die.

The problem here is thinking "Oh, the 5 that survived prove that 1/20 creatures resist spells, just because."

Because if it were me, I'd think "Hmm, what is it about these 5 rats that makes them able to resist my spell, which clearly worked as intended, based on the 95 dead rats I now have."

Faleldir
2010-05-25, 06:49 PM
:smalleek: What have I done?!
I just wanted to explain to the OP that Fighters and Paladins have no built-in way to do their intended job. By the time I finished writing, other people posted and the subject had changed, and my example was poorly worded to begin with. As far as I can tell, this derail about metagame knowledge is my fault. I'm sorry. This is awful.

Boci
2010-05-25, 06:49 PM
The problem here is thinking "Oh, the 5 that survived prove that 1/20 creatures resist spells, just because."

Because if it were me, I'd think "Hmm, what is it about these 5 rats that makes them able to resist my spell, which clearly worked as intended, based on the 95 dead rats I now have."

True, thats why you would need to repeat the experiment multiple times. hurray for scientific progress and pest control all mixed into one.


:smalleek: What have I done?!
I just wanted to explain to the OP that Fighters and Paladins have no built-in way to do their intended job. By the time I finished writing, other people posted and the subject had changed, and my example was poorly worded to begin with. As far as I can tell, this derail about metagame knowledge is my fault. I'm sorry. This is awful.

I'd wouldn't be ashamed if I were you. Sure there was a bit of wasted time on what exactly is metagaming but the discussion has several interesting points reguarding scientific methods of D&D cultures.

Koury
2010-05-25, 06:54 PM
True, thats why you would need to repeat the experiment multiple times. hurray for scientific progress and pest control all mixed into one.

Repeated castings would lead me to believe that about 5% of rats, for a unknown reason, resist my one particular SoD.

I'd have no good reason to extend my knowledge of rats odd trait to other creatures. And it's not like they are consistantly resistant to my magic 5% of the time, either. After all, all 100 die, every time, when I cast Fireball.

Boci
2010-05-25, 06:57 PM
Repeated castings would lead me to believe that about 5% of rats, for a unknown reason, resist my one particular SoD.

Once you have killed 2,000 rate, you should statistically have enough rats to try with all the survivers.

The Glyphstone
2010-05-25, 07:00 PM
True, thats why you would need to repeat the experiment multiple times. hurray for scientific progress and pest control all mixed into one.

Of course, if you're casting offensive magic on rats (let's say that they're Dire Rats, maybe Advanced, so you can actually cast Reflex-half spells on them to test this presumed magical theory), enough times you may conclude that Fireball does fail to kill the rat 5% of the time, regardless of what rats or goblins or commoners you're using to test it. Then you move to...Acid Arrow - but the rule doesn't apply anymore. The rats all die equally - would your immediate reaction be that this supposed universal magical law must be true, but Acid Arrow happens to be an exception? Or would you consider Burning Hands/Shocking Grasp/whatever to be the anomaly? If we're proceeding with true scientific method, you'd probably then pick a third spell...so your conclusions would vary based on if you ended up selecting Hold Person as your third experiment, or Ray of Exhaustion. There's nearly as many spells that don't allow saves as do, a 'bad' string of 'tests' could easily skew the final conclusion.

And, after all this, you have one wizard with a buttload of research notes regarding a bunch of spells and their likelihood of failing to take effect. How is this becoming common knowledge?

Boci
2010-05-25, 07:03 PM
Of course, if you're casting offensive magic on rats (let's say that they're Dire Rats, maybe Advanced, so you can actually cast Reflex-half spells on them to test this presumed magical theory), enough times you may conclude that Fireball does fail to kill the rat 5% of the time, regardless of what rats or goblins or commoners you're using to test it. Then you move to...Acid Arrow - but the rule doesn't apply anymore. The rats all die equally - would your immediate reaction be that this supposed universal magical law must be true, but Acid Arrow happens to be an exception? Or would you consider Burning Hands/Shocking Grasp/whatever to be the anomaly? If we're proceeding with true scientific method, you'd probably then pick a third spell...so your conclusions would vary based on if you ended up selecting Hold Person as your third experiment, or Ray of Exhaustion. There's nearly as many spells that don't allow saves as do, a 'bad' string of 'tests' could easily skew the final conclusion.

I assume wizard know in game the difference between a spell that deal hit point damage and one that does not.


And, after all this, you have one wizard with a buttload of research notes regarding a bunch of spells and their likelihood of failing to take effect. How is this becoming common knowledge?

Academic papers.

Koury
2010-05-25, 07:04 PM
Once you have killed 2,000 rate, you should statistically have enough rats to try with all the survivers.

Which produces odd results, because 95 of the rats I know to have been resistant to my spell just died to it. Continuing down this path will, indeed, lead me to believe it is my spell that fails 5% of the time, however. At least, on rats.

Honestly, I'm mostly on your side here, just questioning the method. I do believe casters know people resist their spells through mental or physical fortitude and/or quickly dodging out of the way somehow. As for it being exactly 5%? Meh. DC 20 Knowledge: Arcana check and sure, why not?

Reynard
2010-05-25, 07:06 PM
Academic papers.

He said 'common knowledge'. How many peasants do you think are interested in, or even capable of, reading dissertations on the effects of magic.

Boci
2010-05-25, 07:09 PM
He said 'common knowledge'. How many peasants do you think are interested in, or even capable of, reading dissertations on the effects of magic.

Sorry I thought it was obvious, I sometimes forget people cannot read my mind. Common knowledge amougst adventurers and inteligent monsters, e.e. those who have a vested interest in learning basic facts about magic.


As for it being exactly 5%? Meh. DC 20 Knowledge: Arcana check and sure, why not?

I just assume these things are known, just like I assume everyone knows that conventional magic has 10 stages of power and fireball creates an area of magical flames that can set fire to mundane material. You do not need to make an knowledge arcana check to know it, although I can understand asking for checks to know the exact number.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 07:11 PM
True, but if someone attacks you and another one casts a spell, which one are you going to attack? You may end up ignoring the DMM persist and attacking the paladin, but its a safe bet.
If I can get out of the furball with the first without dying, not a sure thing with the right Fighter type, I might very well go for the spell thrower, but you have to actually be in combat to do that.




I like to assume the king will pay his court wizard to occasionally work on improving the knowledge of his subjects.
A fun idea, one I would do if I ruled a D&D kingdom, but not one borne out by the cultural stasis most D&D worlds seem to reside in. Besides, we are talking about monsters, who rarely have even medieval level social structures, and are been more commonly found in tribes and clans, nations or organised city-states been rare. Even the exceptions tend to be isolated from the rest of the world, such as Drow.


They do not need to do the research themselves, they just need to have contact with someone who did.
That person would need to be a nerdy wizard type with a keen interest in the fundamentals of magic and research. Why would such a person be in contact with most monsters?

100 rats, cast area affect save or die.
Collect 100 rats, alive. That's quite a bit of time right there. And you are not going to get 5 out of 100 the first time, oh no. That's merely the first test. 5 out of 100 is merely the statistical average.

Now, unless its an area affect, think how many days it will take to cast 100 save or dies. And during that time you have to feed the rats.
And, as already mentioned, your are going to need far more then 100 rats to get the statistical average,and then only approach it. You don't have a die you whose number of sides you multiply by a number to equal 100 to find the probability for a single side.
Science is resource intensive and time consuming.

Boci
2010-05-25, 07:17 PM
If I can get out of the furball with the first without dying, not a sure thing with the right Fighter type, I might very well go for the spell thrower, but you have to actually be in combat to do that.

I'm just saying if your already in combat and someone trying to stab you, your going to start looking at his allies to try and select a target.


A fun idea, one I would do if I ruled a D&D kingdom, but not one borne out by the cultural stasis most D&D worlds seem to reside in. Besides, we are talking about monsters, who rarely have even medieval level social structures, and are been more commonly found in tribes and clans, nations or organised city-states been rare. Even the exceptions tend to be isolated from the rest of the world, such as Drow.

This is just different sytle. I do not run my worlds like this, even if given flavour seems to suggest otherwise.


That person would need to be a nerdy wizard type with a keen interest in the fundamentals of magic and research. Why would such a person be in contact with most monsters?

The contact doesn't need to be direct.


Collect 100 rats, alive. That's quite a bit of time right there. And you are not going to get 5 out of 100 the first time, oh no. That's merely the first test. 5 out of 100 is merely the statistical average.

Now, unless its an area affect, think how many days it will take to cast 100 save or dies. And during that time you have to feed the rats.
And, as already mentioned, your are going to need far more then 100 rats to get the statistical average,and then only approach it. You don't have a die you whose number of sides you can simply divide by 100.
Science is resource intensive and time consuming.

Some mage's don't want to spend their life killing monsters, so they need something to do with their free time.

Fouredged Sword
2010-05-25, 07:20 PM
Back to the first topic. A good ToB build can beat out a wizard, with some prep. Take a Sword Sage. Level 17 or 18 you get the final powers. Just use the last setting sun and dimond mind power, combined with say a dragonborn's flight, to fly up around 500 ft in the air. Ativate Time Stands Still, fly strainght down at a run, moving 10 times your move speed(run feat). (at 30ft move speed that's 300 ft, but you can do better than that easy, 60ft move with just two more feats and a full defensive action, makeing it more like 600 ft)

Now you get to the ground level, and near your foe. Activate the last setting sun power. Now you get to kill everything you can reach in two move actions. You get to move up to twice your move makeing a touch attack every 10 ft. Each attack causes a trip attemp, but becuse of the divebomb at the start of your turn you get +260 something to that, so let's say you pass by 200 or so. You deal +1d6 damage to the target for every five you beat his roll. So that's what... +40d6. You do that to 12 targets. Death from above indeed.

tyckspoon
2010-05-25, 07:27 PM
Time Stands Still does not work that way!

Fax Celestis
2010-05-25, 07:32 PM
Are there any fixen for these that people would recommend?

/me indicates signature.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 07:36 PM
I'm just saying if your already in combat and someone trying to stab you, your going to start looking at his allies to try and select a target.

We are talking mundanes here. The only mundane that can really reach out and touch someone is a an archer. Now ,your in combat, and your clenching with a guy trying to go for your gut and you see someone waggle their fingers and speak a weird incantation and suddenly your brother Pooky starts hacking at his own men. You can call in a strike on such a target, sure, yelling to a ranged specialist in your group to take down that target, or a another magic user if you got them. I don't have a problem with that. Intelligent monsters can and should respond to combat in a realistic way. But my problem is making a beeline for the magic users as soon as combat starts.
That was my problem to begin with.




This is just different sytle. I do not run my worlds like this, even if given flavour seems to suggest otherwise.
That's delightful. But just as most people don't run Tippyverse, most don't have wizards acting like scientists with spells, even though it actually would be pretty cool.

The contact doesn't need to be direct.
How then do you propose the knowledge is transferred? A tribe of orcs whose only contact with the outside world is when raiding or been raided are not going to exactly be ones to value a cache of wizards scrolls and research.


Some mage's don't want to spend their life killing monsters, so they need something to do with their free time.
Yes, I can see that. I rather like it in fact. But that doesn't help a mostly mundane monster tribe, whose magic will be mostly druidic shamanistic, or raw untamed sorcery.

Koury
2010-05-25, 07:41 PM
Yes, I can see that. I rather like it in fact. But that doesn't help a mostly mundane monster tribe, whose magic will be mostly druidic shamanistic, or raw untamed sorcery.

Clearly, these people can still read Scientific Faerunian.

Er, whats a Faerun native actually called, anyway?

Boci
2010-05-25, 07:43 PM
We are talking mundanes here. The only mundane that can really reach out and touch someone is a an archer. Now ,your in combat, and your clenching with a guy trying to go for your gut and you see someone waggle their fingers and speak a weird incantation and suddenly your brother Pooky starts hacking at his own men. You can call in a strike on such a target, sure, yelling to a ranged specialist in your group to take down that target, or a another magic user if you got them. I don't have a problem with that. Intelligent monsters can and should respond to combat in a realistic way. But my problem is making a beeline for the magic users as soon as combat starts.
That was my problem to begin with.

My problem was assuming that a monster going for the caster is metagaming, especially when so many characters may as well have their class names written in large letters on their hats. Unless the party specifically states that they are doing X and Y to disguis themselves, I assume an inteligent monster has a pretty good idea of who is and who isn't a soft target.


That's delightful. But just as most people don't run Tippyverse, most don't have wizards acting like scientists with spells, even though it actually would be pretty cool.

Thats because is usually never comes up in game. I'm sure most DMs have some non-adventuring wizards academy, its just not relevant to the plot exactly what they do so not much detail is given.


How then do you propose the knowledge is transferred? A tribe of orcs whose only contact with the outside world is when raiding or been raided are not going to exactly be ones to value a cache of wizards scrolls and research.

Yes, I can see that. I rather like it in fact. But that doesn't help a mostly mundane monster tribe, whose magic will be mostly druidic shamanistic, or raw untamed sorcery.

Peaceful trade, prisoners of war, captured books, spies for more sophistocated calns.

Gnaeus
2010-05-25, 07:48 PM
But my problem is making a beeline for the magic users as soon as combat starts.
That was my problem to begin with.

Most humanoid tribes are in a state of nearly constant war. An Orc is just as capable of recognizing the distinctive dress of priority targets as, for example, colonial inhabitants were often able to identify officers by their different uniforms.


How then do you propose the knowledge is transferred? A tribe of orcs whose only contact with the outside world is when raiding or been raided are not going to exactly be ones to value a cache of wizards scrolls and research.

Yes, I can see that. I rather like it in fact. But that doesn't help a mostly mundane monster tribe, whose magic will be mostly druidic shamanistic, or raw untamed sorcery.

Druids, Shamans, and Sorcerers all have spellcraft. The druids and shamans at least are smart enough to value magical research.

The tribes that don't kill casters first all died hundreds of years ago. Elves have lots of casters. Humanoids hate elves. Do the math.

The Glyphstone
2010-05-25, 07:49 PM
My problem was assuming that a monster going for the caster is metagaming, especially when so many characters may as well have their class names written in large letters on their hats. Unless the party specifically states that they are doing X and Y to disguis themselves, I assume an inteligent monster has a pretty good idea of who is and who isn't a soft target.


For some cases, that's fair. "Guy in Armor" (fighter) versus "Guy in Robes" (wizard) - even dumb monsters can probably tell those apart.

But "Guy in armor with mace" (Cleric) and "Guy in Armor with Sword" (Paladin) is a lot closer, and even an intelligent monster shouldn't be able to single out the cleric from a lineup of paladins easily, or without training...your earlier example was of a Halfling paladin and a Half-orc cleric. What if they're both Half-Orcs, with the same Strength score? You probably won't be able to tell them apart until a few turns of one, the other, or both trying to beat on you, or else when the Cleric casts a nasty full-caster spell.

Boci
2010-05-25, 07:55 PM
What if they're both Half-Orcs, with the same Strength score? You probably won't be able to tell them apart until a few turns of one, the other, or both trying to beat on you, or else when the Cleric casts a nasty full-caster spell.

As I said, none of this is fool proof, but there are indication an inteligent monster could pick up on to give him a better than 50%
Usually, a paladin has a higher strength score, which may be observable as bulkier muscles.
The paladin wil most probably have a mount, the cleric may not.
Full BAB may have visual tells compared to someone with average BAB.
If they are wielding a simple weapon, they are most likely a cleric.

Ect.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 07:58 PM
My problem was assuming that a monster going for the caster is metagaming, especially when so many characters may as well have their class names written in large letters on their hats. Unless the party specifically states that they are doing X and Y to disguis themselves, I assume an inteligent monster has a pretty good idea of who is and who isn't a soft target.

You don't need to disguise yourself, just not be typical.




Thats because is usually never comes up in game. I'm sure most DMs have some non-adventuring wizards academy, its just not relevant to the plot exactly what they do so not much detail is given.
Maybe they do, but that doesnt help monsters out in the boonies, far away from such civilised niceties.



Peaceful trade, prisoners of war, captured books, spies for more sophistocated calns.
With default gnolls, prisoners are usually food that isn't eaten yet. Milking them for information doesn't enter into the equation. With other monstrous races, prisoners, if taken at all, are usually slaves. What value is a captured book aside tinder or the jewels and gold from an illuminated manuscript written in a language you may not speak, let alone read? And even if you can read the writing, and have an interest, both likely rare among creatures living a hunter-gatherer-raider existence, the writings may have a code, as did many medieval alchemist to stop others from finding out their secrets, or the language used is simply sesquipedalian and obtuse.
Spies will be providing 3rd hand information, if they even take an interest themselves.

Godskook
2010-05-25, 07:58 PM
Once you have killed 2,000 rate, you should statistically have enough rats to try with all the survivers.

You're really forgetting the amount of advanced mathematics(Statistics *and* Calculus) involved in proving where the Margin of Error is.

Without mathematical rigor, which is uncommon among everyone, including mathematicians when they're not in 'math-mode', you'll likely only have anecdotal evidence, which is highly skewed in almost all situations.

Since arcana does not require a knowledge of mathematics, it is unlikely for most wizards to have the understanding required to derive *and* use the math necessary to come upon a '1 in 20' rule. Especially when you're talking about something that contains more than one variable, which you're assuming only 1 of(A very faulty assumption). At the very least, you're not accounting for creatures with saves high enough to resist on something other than a natural 20. Since traits, flaws, ability scores(including charisma and int), feats and HD all affect what someone's save is, even while naked and dispelled, there's going to be a lot of difficulty pinning down what is a creature with a 'too low' save required for using in such testing, and without such a creature, you're going to need to account for non-bernoulli distributions.

Boci
2010-05-25, 08:03 PM
You're really forgetting the amount of advanced mathematics(Statistics *and* Calculus) involved in proving where the Margin of Error is.

Without mathematical rigor, which is uncommon among everyone, including mathematicians when they're not in 'math-mode', you'll likely only have anecdotal evidence, which is highly skewed in almost all situations.

That sounds like a statement that can neither be proven or disproven. Pinning down a the number to 5% doesn't soun like it requires that high a level of mathematics. Besdies, in D&D, checking your asnwers is easy. Contact out plane: is the conlcusion I have come to correct?


Since arcana does not require a knowledge of mathematics, it is unlikely for most wizards to have the understanding required to derive *and* use the math necessary to come upon a '1 in 20' rule. Especially when you're talking about something that contains more than one variable, which you're assuming only 1 of(A very faulty assumption). At the very least, you're not accounting for creatures with saves high enough to resist on something other than a natural 20. Since traits, flaws, ability scores(including charisma and int), feats and HD all affect what someone's save is, even while naked and dispelled, there's going to be a lot of difficulty pinning down what is a creature with a 'too low' save required for using in such testing, and without such a creature, you're going to need to account for non-bernoulli distributions.

True. For rats you would want a DC save of around 22, so 22 inteligence + a 6th level spell should do. Evnetually someone that powerful is going to try.


You don't need to disguise yourself, just not be typical.

True. Depends on exactly what the PCs do.


Maybe they do, but that doesnt help monsters out in the boonies, far away from such civilised niceties.

I was just explaining that most games probably do havethe components scientific wizards, thay are just never seen.


With default gnolls, prisoners are usually food that isn't eaten yet. Milking them for information doesn't enter into the equation. With other monstrous races, prisoners, if taken at all, are usually slaves. What value is a captured book aside tinder or the jewels and gold from an illuminated manuscript written in a language you may not speak, let alone read? And even if you can read the writing, and have an interest, both likely rare among creatures living a hunter-gatherer-raider existence, the writings may have a code, as did many medieval alchemist to stop others from finding out their secrets, or the language used is simply sesquipedalian and obtuse.
Spies will be providing 3rd hand information, if they even take an interest themselves.

I tend to assume monsters act more inteligently than that, even the tribe of orcs. Sooner or later one of them is going to realize how much books are worth to more advanced races and look into it.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 08:11 PM
Most humanoid tribes are in a state of nearly constant war. An Orc is just as capable of recognizing the distinctive dress of priority targets as, for example, colonial inhabitants were often able to identify officers by their different uniforms.

A paladin and cleric potentially have no differences in dress,as would a devout gish in full plate.




Druids, Shamans, and Sorcerers all have spellcraft. The druids and shamans at least are smart enough to value magical research.
Would they? As far they are concerned they get their magic from their gods or from their connection with the wilds. To them magical research might feel sacrilegious.


The tribes that don't kill casters first all died hundreds of years ago. Elves have lots of casters. Humanoids hate elves. Do the math.
Elves reproduce slowly and have always been fairly few. The ratio may be higher, but the numbers are fewer.

Godskook
2010-05-25, 08:13 PM
That sounds like a statement that can neither be proven or disproven. Pinning down a the number to 5% doesn't soun like it requires that high a level of mathematics. Besdies, in D&D, checking your asnwers is easy. Contact out plane: is the conlcusion I have come to correct?

5th level spell, and unless your DM always rolls the check, you're relying on being able to contact a god who actually knows the answer to said question, and in a world where mathematics isn't as prolific as 'arcana', its entirely possible that not even the gods know the correct answer.

Wait, "doesn't sound". Have you ever studied statistics?


True. For rats you would want a DC save of around 22, so 22 inteligence + a 6th level spell should do. Evnetually someone that powerful is going to try.

You're metagaming that IC-hidden assumption that a DC 22 spell is what is needed. No IC wizard would know that.

And sure, someone will eventually try, somewhere, but what makes you think their results are commonly well known? Especially since this is a high-level spellcaster in a world of dangerous critters.

Gnaeus
2010-05-25, 08:18 PM
A paladin and cleric potentially have no differences in dress,as would a devout gish in full plate.

I'm not saying they are impossible to fool and will inerrantly go after casters when everyone looks the same. But when facing standard adventuring party A they will kill the obvious casters first.



Would they? As far they are concerned they get their magic from their gods or from their connection with the wilds. To them magical research might feel sacrilegious

Every tribe that held that view is dead. Killed by casters.


Elves reproduce slowly and have always been fairly few. The ratio may be higher, but the numbers are fewer.

I'm not saying that humanoids would have killed all the elves (although in some worlds that is possible). I am saying that humanoids have hundreds or thousands of years of experience fighting casters. The tribes that didn't learn the basic lessons aren't tribes anymore. The only exceptions would be tribes trapped in areas like islands with 0 contact with other humanoids or magic using races.

Boci
2010-05-25, 08:19 PM
5th level spell, and unless your DM always rolls the check, you're relying on being able to contact a god who actually knows the answer to said question, and in a world where mathematics isn't as prolific as 'arcana', its entirely possible that not even the gods know the correct answer.


Wait, "doesn't sound". Have you ever studied statistics?

Not beyond high school. I'm just guessing that eventially 5% will emerge as the mimum.


You're metagaming that IC-hidden assumption that a DC 22 spell is what is needed. No IC wizard would know that.

I am metagaming to figure out how rare the wizards would be that can get the number down to 1 in 20. My conclusion caster who can cast a DC: 22 spell are not incredably rare.


And sure, someone will eventually try, somewhere, but what makes you think their results are commonly well known? Especially since this is a high-level spellcaster in a world of dangerous critters.

Academic papers off the top of my herad.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 08:26 PM
True. Depends on exactly what the PCs do.

Exactly, but there more adventurers then just the PC's. They don't get met usually because it isn't plot relevant, but they must be there to support all the magic item merchants and so forth.




I was just explaining that most games probably do havethe components scientific wizards, thay are just never seen.
If they are there, they are keeping their knowledge secret and hidden, even from the rest of their parent culture.



I tend to assume monsters act more inteligently than that, even the tribe of orcs. Sooner or later one of them is going to realize how much books are worth to more advanced races and look into it.
As trade goods, yes. But how many manuscripts containing Greek scientific work were stolen by Vikings from monasteries? They never tried to 'look into it' to my knowledge, and they were humans.

Boci
2010-05-25, 08:29 PM
If they are there, they are keeping their knowledge secret and hidden, even from the rest of their parent culture.

Not neccisarily, especially if they are funded by the realm's aristocrats/merchants.


As trade goods, yes. But how many manuscripts containing Greek scientific work were stolen by Vikings from monasteries? They never tried to 'look into it' to my knowledge, and they were humans.

In a world were magic, even if it was believed in, was not as common place as it is in a D&D setting.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 08:41 PM
Not neccisarily, especially if they are funded by the realm's aristocrats/merchants.

Yes, necessarily. You may run your games differently, but most seem to be in a Mediaeval Stasis (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MedievalStasis). Sorry for linking to that black hole ,but it's points are relevant. If the knowledge was been shared freely or at least used to economic benefit, society would change. Probably not to the same as ours, but it would change. Imagine factories with undead powered treadmills or with the right instruction, undead workers in an assembly line, a waterwheel powered by a couple of endless decanters set on geyser, or even questions on the success of business ventures with Contact Other Planes.
But it generally doesn't.



In a world were magic, even if it was believed in, was not as common place as it is in a D&D setting.
It's not about the magic, its about the knowledge. The Vikings didn't use this knowledge despite having it and the fact others valued it.

Boci
2010-05-25, 08:47 PM
Yes, necessarily. You may run your games differently, but most seem to be in a Mediaeval Stasis (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MedievalStasis). Sorry for linking to that black hole ,but it's points are relevant. If the knowledge was been shared freely or at least used to economic benefit, society would change. Probably not to the same as ours, but it would change. Imagine factories with undead powered treadmills or with the right instruction, undead workers in an assembly line, a waterwheel powered by a couple of endless decanters set on geyser, or even questions on the success of business ventures with Contact Other Planes.
But it generally doesn't.

Any nation that accepts undead uses them just as you described, if who ever runs the factory is willing to pay 25gp for an eternal 24 hour / day worker. But often undead are banned due to moral issues. Contact Outer Plane can be used, but its price puts it above the average business man to use reguarly and the yes/no answer means the question is limited in scope.


It's not about the magic, its about the knowledge. The Vikings didn't use this knowledge despite having it and the fact others valued it.

Yes, but if there was an abundance of magic in the world that they reguarly saw with their 2 eyes they may have taken a greater interest in knowledge and writing.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 09:05 PM
Any nation that accepts undead uses them just as you described, if who ever runs the factory is willing to pay 25gp for an eternal 24 hour / day worker. But often undead are banned due to moral issues. Contact Outer Plane can be used, but its price puts it above the average business man to use reguarly and the yes/no answer means the question is limited in scope.

Which leads to another delightful idea. Venture Capital. Simply put, you convince enough other people that you can get a near certain profit if you get enough for start up and to pay Mage Louis the 450 gold florins needed to cast the spell. And a yes no is perfect.
"If I buy such and such cargo, set sail for Such and Such City on such and such day, and sell my cargo there, will I make a profit on my venture?" As for undead, well, I like the idea, some may not, but it could also be done with animated objects or golems.



Yes, but if there was an abundance of magic in the world that they reguarly saw with their 2 eyes they may have taken a greater interest in knowledge and writing.
An isolated tribe of orcs is unlikely to see arcane magic regularly, except as already mentioned sorcery, and possibly bards, and their divine magic is probably going to be wrapped up in superstition and theatre. Also, the Norse sailed all over, as far as Constantinople and farther. They could see a more advanced technically advanced society, yet still never applied it to their own lives.

Boci
2010-05-25, 09:19 PM
Which leads to another delightful idea. Venture Capital. Simply put, you convince enough other people that you can get a near certain profit if you get enough for start up and to pay Mage Louis the 450 gold florins needed to cast the spell.

Only one hears the answer though. He need to convince the others he isn't lying. Plus there is a risk with contact out planes, meaning the price will increase and finding a mage willing to cast it will be harder.


And a yes no is perfect.
"If I buy such and such cargo, set sail for Such and Such City on such and such day, and sell my cargo there, will I make a profit on my venture?"

1 copper piece is a profit, but the venture won't be worth your time. And with that wording the spell is open ended as to whether it is considered part of the venture, leaving you with a 450+gp range.


As for undead, well, I like the idea, some may not, but it could also be done with animated objects or golems.

They're a bit more exspensive though. Plus you would need to really the necromancer/wizard who creates them.


An isolated tribe of orcs is unlikely to see arcane magic regularly, except as already mentioned sorcery, and possibly bards, and their divine magic is probably going to be wrapped up in superstition and theatre. Also, the Norse sailed all over, as far as Constantinople and farther. They could see a more advanced technically advanced society, yet still never applied it to their own lives.

I'm not entierly convinced thats a fair comparison. The vikings were relativly safe from invasion, and your example fails to take into account that orcs already know magic exists. Why shouldn't they try and understand their opponents version of it?

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 09:37 PM
Only one hears the answer though. He need to convince the others he isn't lying. Plus there is a risk with contact out planes, meaning the price will increase and finding a mage willing to cast it will be harder.

If the mage is part of the deal, paying part of the venture and been paid after, it is in their interest to tell the truth.




1 copper piece is a profit, but the venture won't be worth your time. And with that wording the spell is open ended as to whether it is considered part of the venture, leaving you with a 450+gp range.
So I need to word my questions better. With the right wording, such as asking if an at least 10% profit will result, and repeated trips, it would indeed be worth your time.




They're a bit more exspensive though. Plus you would need to really the necromancer/wizard who creates them.
You also need to trust that the engineer isn't working under the table for the competition, subtly sabotaging your machinery as they install it. And so would blossom the red taped, triplicated, fine printed, art of the Contract.




I'm not entierly convinced thats a fair comparison. The vikings were relativly safe from invasion, and your example fails to take into account that orcs already know magic exists. Why shouldn't they try and understand their opponents version of it?

You're forgetting the isolation of a typical monster tribe. They would have no reason to not assume that the wizard burning them to a crisp is any different from the twitchy eyed runt of a sorcerer. And they could very well consider it against their religion, and or not warrior-like enough to be worth their time. Ever watch 'Full Metal Alchemist' with the Ishvalan stance on alchemy? Scar and his brother were aberrations.

Godskook
2010-05-25, 09:43 PM
Not beyond high school. I'm just guessing that eventially 5% will emerge as the mimum.

B.S. in mathematics here. I spent months of boring research and over 5k samples to not prove that a +5% modifier was +5%(Specifically, I was trying to prove what the affect of Reoderant was in KoL, adventuring exclusively at the Penultimate Airship, after consolidating thousands of data points from various volunteers, I still couldn't categorically prove 5%)

Umael
2010-05-25, 10:14 PM
I get amused by these kinds of threads because I prefer Iron Heroes to D&D these days.

Oh well.

Gametime
2010-05-25, 10:40 PM
B.S. in mathematics here. I spent months of boring research and over 5k samples to not prove that a +5% modifier was +5%(Specifically, I was trying to prove what the affect of Reoderant was in KoL, adventuring exclusively at the Penultimate Airship, after consolidating thousands of data points from various volunteers, I still couldn't categorically prove 5%)

Just going to jump in and offer support for the idea that statistically proving anything is really, really hard.

On top of that, the modern scientific method is relatively recent, and certainly postdates the vague medieval time period D&D is supposed to resemble. Science in general vastly predates that, but the methods employed varied to a reasonable degree across nations and between different practitioners. The idea that you need to test something exhaustively and eliminate other possible variables only became widespread within the last 500 or so years.

Further, there's no real reason to assume that someone would even want to test this. So you see an obviously weak peasant survive a spell. Maybe you tell the tavern all about it. How many people are likely to believe you? How many will assume you just saw it wrong? How many will disregard you as a drunk?

How many peasants are going to be subjected to spells with no effect on a successful save, anyway? How many of those instances will be witnessed?

For that matter, if knowledge of magic is widespread, why would you assume that the obviously weak peasant is an obviously weak peasant? If you don't already know about the "5% rule," the more obvious conclusion is that the peasant is secretly a badass. He could be one of those unassuming martial masters, or a polymorphed dragon, or a polymorphed rakshasa, or a polymorphed wizard, or any of a number of things.

Beyond that, it is a massive extrapolation to conclude that because some commoners can survive spells, some of all creatures can. Why test rats? You have no reason to think it'll work.

And beyond that, you can't rule out things like spell resistance (which will also sometimes fail), unusually high saves, and plain ol' divine intervention. Rejecting supernatural explanations was a huge step in the development of the modern scientific method; when supernatural explanations are entirely valid, as they are in D&D, applying science gets a whole lot harder.

(Most supernatural stuff follows rules in D&D, admittedly, but gods can do a lot, and in any world where they intervene regularly scientific testing is going to be quite difficult.)


I get amused by these kinds of threads because I prefer Iron Heroes to D&D these days.

Oh well.

My favorite part about Iron Heroes is never having to wonder if the wizard is just going to teleport somewhere.

Ravens_cry
2010-05-25, 11:04 PM
I'm not saying they are impossible to fool and will inerrantly go after casters when everyone looks the same. But when facing standard adventuring party A they will kill the obvious casters first.

A standard well equiped adventuring part needs meat to shield, healing to heal, a caster to mix things up, skills to bypass traps, and magic to do what magic does. What form those take is combinationally variable, including an individual playing multiple rolls and that's assuming all parties are well equipped.



Every tribe that held that view is dead. Killed by casters.
That's assuming casters are going to going all proactive and destructive.




I'm not saying that humanoids would have killed all the elves (although in some worlds that is possible). I am saying that humanoids have hundreds or thousands of years of experience fighting casters. The tribes that didn't learn the basic lessons aren't tribes anymore. The only exceptions would be tribes trapped in areas like islands with 0 contact with other humanoids or magic using races.
Like I said earlier, they will likely have a body of lore and rumors, some more accurate and useful then others, for combating their enemies, including enemy casters. But it's not all going to be 100% accurate, 100% of the time.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-26, 12:56 AM
Clearly, these people can still read Scientific Faerunian.

Er, whats a Faerun native actually called, anyway?

Can I steal this? Please?
As for meta-knowledge, I honestly don't care if it is or not. Life is ridiculously hard for monsters anyway, I think we can cut them a break if their evil deity invests in them a bit of knowledge regarding the hated arcanists. You know, in the interest of trying to actually see his people well. Yes, kobolds in my campaigns worship the mighty Mynma'xtor, Draconic Praetor of Knowledge and Blood.

Related: There are deities of magic. There are priests of these deities. They keep libraries and ask questions. It's not quite science, but it's at least as good as social studies, neh? ;)

Lost Wanderer
2010-05-26, 02:38 AM
For casters finding these things out, how about this:
*Mage casts Contact Other Plane to reach Boccob.*
Mage: Hey Boccob, why does it seem to be true that most combat magic from Sleep to Baleful Polymorph, particularly things like charms and illusions, sometimes fails when cast by great wizards on pathetic kobolds?
Boccob: Because spells that can be resisted at all can sometimes be resisted by the meanest creatures.
Mage: What? Why?
Boccob: You heard me. Its just how the system works. There's a minimum flat chance a target will come out less or unharmed, depending on the spell.
Mage: What's the minimum chance?
Boccob: 5%
Mage: Why 5%?
Boccob: You're out of questions, now leave me alone. Oh, and have some mental capability drain for good measure.
*Mage takes mental stat drain from casting Contact Other Plane*

Of course, the answer to "Why 5%?" is pretty much a GM's choice kind of thing.


B.S. in mathematics here. I spent months of boring research and over 5k samples to not prove that a +5% modifier was +5%(Specifically, I was trying to prove what the affect of Reoderant was in KoL, adventuring exclusively at the Penultimate Airship, after consolidating thousands of data points from various volunteers, I still couldn't categorically prove 5%)

Because of how the queues work, isn't it bascially impossible to pin it down as 5%, because non-combat rates are actually not quite whole percentages?

Godskook
2010-05-26, 03:31 AM
For casters finding these things out, how about this:
*Mage casts Contact Other Plane to reach Boccob.*
Mage: Hey Boccob, why does it seem to be true that most combat magic from Sleep to Baleful Polymorph, particularly things like charms and illusions, sometimes fails when cast by great wizards on pathetic kobolds?
Boccob: Because spells that can be resisted at all can sometimes be resisted by the meanest creatures.
Mage: What? Why?
Boccob: You heard me. Its just how the system works. There's a minimum flat chance a target will come out less or unharmed, depending on the spell.
Mage: What's the minimum chance?
Boccob: 5%
Mage: Why 5%?
Boccob: You're out of questions, now leave me alone. Oh, and have some mental capability drain for good measure.
*Mage takes mental stat drain from casting Contact Other Plane*

Of course, the answer to "Why 5%?" is pretty much a GM's choice kind of thing.

1.Your order is horribly wrong here. The mental stat drain comes before you get answer #1, and prevents you from getting it at all.

2.D&D gods are not omniscient. A god has to know the answer to a question to be able to give it to you. Outside pun-pun level RAW, this means that dice rolls won't 'force' there to be a god who knows the '1 in 20' rule. They also won't 'force' you to pre-know which one does. Just read a key part of the spell. If a god doesn't know the correct answer, he makes one up. There is no "Just ask a god" scenario unless there's a god who knows, and I don't know of any gods who are skilled in Calculus, and 'godly' math skills for a D&D universe could mean as little as a basic understanding of Algebra.

3.Considering the number of 'shoulders' modern math is sitting on(including statistics), I'd argue that Know(math) checks are really, really hard for anything past the point where Arithmetic and Algebra meet. I can just imagine trying to explain the concept of imaginary numbers to someone, including why they can't 'make' them non-imaginary. I'm talking DC 30 to derive the quadratic formula, at a bare minimum, and that's after a day's work making the check every hour.

4.I never said it was impossible, just really a lot harder to do than what Boci was making it out to be.


Because of how the queues work, isn't it bascially impossible to pin it down as 5%, because non-combat rates are actually not quite whole percentages?

1.The queue was incredibly different back then(2005, iirc). Also, the queue worked differently in a setting with only 1 non-combat in it. That's why we chose that area. We were 'hoping' to eliminate the queue's contamination, which, I think we were unsuccessful in, due to the fact that the queue still triggers, just to adjust the combat ratio.

2.We pinned it down to a small range of about 3-7%(iirc) and inferred that it was 5% based on....'other' data(Namely that Jick loves whole numbers).

3.Our work relied heavily on statistics that was derived from calculus, which definitively sits outside of the standard D&D stettings.

Lost Wanderer
2010-05-26, 03:54 AM
1.Your order is horribly wrong here. The mental stat drain comes before you get answer #1, and prevents you from getting it at all.
Really? Could have sworn it was the other way. Ok, assume the Mage avoided the brunt of the ability drain and Boccob just cursed him because he's Boccob and hates being annoyed.



2.D&D gods are not omniscient. A god has to know the answer to a question to be able to give it to you. Outside pun-pun level RAW, this means that dice rolls won't 'force' there to be a god who knows the '1 in 20' rule. They also won't 'force' you to pre-know which one does. Just read a key part of the spell. If a god doesn't know the correct answer, he makes one up. There is no "Just ask a god" scenario unless there's a god who knows, and I don't know of any gods who are skilled in Calculus, and 'godly' math skills for a D&D universe could mean as little as a basic understanding of Algebra.
But Boccob is the God of Magic. That's why I picked him. If there exists a being that knows the nature of how magic works, it's him. It is, in fact, his thing, being the steward of magic. He better damn well know everything it is possible to know about magic. And even if he doesn't know this off the top of his head, he could use his Greater God level Intelligence, spellcasting and salient divine abilities to experiment and figure it out. Though I figure that, being around as long as he has, he already knows. He doesn't tell anyone unless they ask because he's Boccob and he doesn't care, and no one asks because the phenomena is pretty hard to observe in the first place.



3.Considering the number of 'shoulders' modern math is sitting on(including statistics), I'd argue that Know(math) checks are really, really hard for anything past the point where Arithmetic and Algebra meet. I can just imagine trying to explain the concept of imaginary numbers to someone, including why they can't 'make' them non-imaginary. I'm talking DC 30 to derive the quadratic formula, at a bare minimum, and that's after a day's work making the check every hour.
Again, deity level Intelligence and access to all the knowledge that ever was and is.



4.I never said it was impossible, just really a lot harder to do than what Boci was making it out to be.
It certainly would be hard for mortals to figure out, but, again, Greater God of Magic. He probably already knows.



1.The queue was incredibly different back then(2005, iirc). Also, the queue worked differently in a setting with only 1 non-combat in it. That's why we chose that area. We were 'hoping' to eliminate the queue's contamination, which, I think we were unsuccessful in, due to the fact that the queue still triggers, just to adjust the combat ratio.

2.We pinned it down to a small range of about 3-7%(iirc) and inferred that it was 5% based on....'other' data(Namely that Jick loves whole numbers).

3.Our work relied heavily on statistics that was derived from calculus, which definitively sits outside of the standard D&D stettings.
Ah. Perhaps you were doing the project that discovered the fact that queses had effects on each other in the first place.

Godskook
2010-05-26, 04:45 AM
Really? Could have sworn it was the other way. Ok, assume the Mage avoided the brunt of the ability drain and Boccob just cursed him because he's Boccob and hates being annoyed.

Ok, so how many assumptions are you using?


But Boccob is the God of Magic. That's why I picked him.

Did you look for a God of Science, or a God of Math? Cause both would be far more qualified.


Again, deity level Intelligence and access to all the knowledge that ever was and is.

Where are you getting this? It isn't in Deities and Demigods, and it isn't on any of the wikis I can find, and omniscience is a quite powerful ability. Ah, found it Deities and Demigods, but Boccob doesn't take it.


It certainly would be hard for mortals to figure out, but, again, Greater God of Magic. He probably already knows.

Ok, are you making things up? Cause this directly conflicts with your previous statement. Pick one, is Boccob omniscient or not?

If he is, prove it.

If he isn't, then Know(math) is a skill he does not have ranks in, and as such, his third edition self is limited to reaching only 'common' facts about(DC 10). Considering understanding Algebra is required to understanding Calculus, which is subsequently required to proving percentages in multivariable statistics, we can safely designate that as DC 11 or higher, and outside the domain of someone untrained in the area.

Flickerdart
2010-05-26, 08:25 AM
I would say that the god of magic doesn't need to "prove" anything. He simply knows. Making gods have to mathematically calculate all parts of their portfolio is exceptionally silly and genocidal to catgirls.

Prodan
2010-05-26, 08:29 AM
Boccob uses his godly powers add the powers of the Kraken's Braclet (+2 to Int checks, can make untrained knowledge checks as if trained skills) to whatever bracers he his wearing.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 09:55 AM
I don't know. I think that monks and paladins can be quite good. Most casters I have seen have low strength, even lower than commoners. It stands to reason that classes with high speed and good saves could get close and grapple casters to death.

Boci
2010-05-26, 10:00 AM
I don't know. I think that monks and paladins can be quite good. Most casters I have seen have low strength, even lower than commoners. It stands to reason that classes with high speed and good saves could get close and grapple casters to death.

Problem is casters literally have a ton of defenses against everything. They do not always have the right spell, but if they do your tactic won't work, or make it a lot harder.
Heart of water/freedom of movement - cannot be grappled
Dimesion door - no sonomatic components requires, teleport away
Displacement/mirror - 50 or worse miss chance on the touch attack to initiate grapple
invisibility - can't find him, have to waste one round activating your see invisibility item
Flying or otherwise out of reach - self explanatory
Winning initiative + ray of exhaution/a number of debuff spells - make movement and attacks hard

Prodan
2010-05-26, 10:02 AM
Anklets of Translocation
Benign Transposition
Dimension Hop
Polymorph

Boci
2010-05-26, 10:04 AM
Anklets of Translocation

True.


Benign Transposition

Requires sonomatic components no?


Dimension Hop

Forgot about that one.


Polymorph

Another good one I forgot.

The Glyphstone
2010-05-26, 10:07 AM
End result - casters have a huge list of ways to foil melee attackers and especially grapplers, and they only need one of them prepared to ruin your day as a grappler.

Prodan
2010-05-26, 10:09 AM
Requires sonomatic components no?



I seem to remember it as another verbal component only spell.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 10:10 AM
Problem is casters literally have a ton of defenses against everything. They do not always have the right spell, but if they do your tactic won't work, or make it a lot harder.
Dimesion door - no sonomatic components requires, teleport away
Displacement/mirror - 50 or worse miss chance on the touch attack to initiate grapple
invisibility - can't find him, have to waste one round activating your see invisibility item
Flying or otherwise out of reach - self explanatory

Dimension door needs verbal though, and that won't work when you're pinned.
Displacement is overcome by flurry (travel devotion can get you close), or scout's headband.
Invisibility can cut both ways, with the ring.
There are a lot of ways to gain flight.

I mean, yeah, a wizard could have a lot of those, but will he? It seems like a very situational argument to me.

AstralFire
2010-05-26, 10:14 AM
Freedom of movement negates grappling entirely. It is far too useful a spell and I usually ban it or make it 8 or 9th level for a reason.

Boci
2010-05-26, 10:15 AM
Dimension door needs verbal though, and that won't work when you're pinned.

Cannot pin in the first round.



Invisibility can cut both ways, with the ring.

I'm thinking of the spell version.


There are a lot of ways to gain flight.

Yes and most of them are expensive for melee.


I mean, yeah, a wizard could have a lot of those, but will he? It seems like a very situational argument to me.

We list 5+ spell that can foil a grapple and another 5 that make it much harder and you call that situational? You think its a strecht a wizard will have at least 1 of these spells prepared?
The scouts headband is situational because it costs money. A wizard chooses new spells every day.

Amphetryon
2010-05-26, 10:16 AM
Dimension door needs verbal though, and that won't work when you're pinned.
Displacement is overcome by flurry (travel devotion can get you close), or scout's headband.
Invisibility can cut both ways, with the ring.
There are a lot of ways to gain flight.

I mean, yeah, a wizard could have a lot of those, but will he? It seems like a very situational argument to me.

Silent Spell, Still Spell, and a Wizard has spells to aid his Grapple checks, too.

You're going to have to explain what you mean by 'overcome by flurry'; flurry of blows makes a Monk have a more difficult time hitting, coupled with the miss chance of Displacement. Scout's Headband means they've chosen not to use other useful items for that slot. Wizards just need a scroll, or 24 hours.

Wizards get easier access to See Invisibility than non-casters, and need waste no monetary resources on rings.

Wizards need waste no monetary resources on Flight.

In other words, all the resources that are spent by a non-caster to 'counter' Wizard tactics are, in reality, only bringing them up to the Wizard's baseline, before said Wizard gets to buy any gear himself. That does not make a level playing field as I understand the concept.

The Glyphstone
2010-05-26, 10:17 AM
Dimension door needs verbal though, and that won't work when you're pinned.
Displacement is overcome by flurry (travel devotion can get you close), or scout's headband.
Invisibility can cut both ways, with the ring.
There are a lot of ways to gain flight.

I mean, yeah, a wizard could have a lot of those, but will he? It seems like a very situational argument to me.

You won't be able to pin the same turn you establish the grapple, so he'll be able to get away.

As I said, the problem is that of options, the same reason full casters are top-tier and fighters/monks are bottom-tier. You, as the attacking grappler, have one attack option - grappling (and if you have flurry, you're a monk, which makes the problem even worse). The defending wizard has a double handful of defensive options, and out of that long list, he doesn't need 'a lot' of them, he only needs one. If he doesn't, then you'll beat him, and you've improved the entire Wizard class through Darwinian natural selection. But if he does, then unless you have full-caster support of your own, its extremely unlikely that you'll be permitted to get a second shot at it.

Prodan
2010-05-26, 10:21 AM
Displacement is overcome by flurry (travel devotion can get you close), or scout's headband.


I mean, yeah, a wizard monk could have a lot of those, but will he? It seems like a very situational argument to me.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 10:25 AM
No, this one I did. In the last game I was playing (my boyfriend helped me make my character), I used travel devotion to close in on a caster. He was invisible, but I heard him because I had good wisdom and a lot of points in my hearing skill. So I go over to him and flurry. I had 4 attacks, and hit the wizard on the second hit, and grappled him. On my 3rd attack, I pinned him.

You can pin on the first round. You just have to plan for it like wizards plan their spell lists. I mean really, if the wizard goes into the fight with 25 spells and good plans for them and the monk doesn't, he's gonna lose. But if the other guy also plans, doesn't that even up the odds a bit?

Prodan
2010-05-26, 10:30 AM
Anecdotal evidence
And all my casters have ways to escape grapple starting from level 3.



But if the other guy also plans, doesn't that even up the odds a bit?

Planning runs off of Int, right?

Amphetryon
2010-05-26, 10:31 AM
No, this one I did. In the last game I was playing (my boyfriend helped me make my character), I used travel devotion to close in on a caster. He was invisible, but I heard him because I had good wisdom and a lot of points in my hearing skill. So I go over to him and flurry. I had 4 attacks, and hit the wizard on the second hit, and grappled him. On my 3rd attack, I pinned him.

You can pin on the first round. You just have to plan for it like wizards plan their spell lists. I mean really, if the wizard goes into the fight with 25 spells and good plans for them and the monk doesn't, he's gonna lose. But if the other guy also plans, doesn't that even up the odds a bit?
Grapple Rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#grapple). Please highlight, for my edification, the section that says you can pin on the same round you initiate a grapple.

Locating an Invisible person is a DC 40 check. That's some phenomenal rolling on your part, and some silly tactics from a Wizard to not be Flying at an encounter level where a DC 40 check was a reasonable chance of success.

Boci
2010-05-26, 10:32 AM
No, this one I did. In the last game I was playing (my boyfriend helped me make my character), I used travel devotion to close in on a caster. He was invisible, but I heard him because I had good wisdom and a lot of points in my hearing skill. So I go over to him and flurry. I had 4 attacks, and hit the wizard on the second hit, and grappled him. On my 3rd attack, I pinned him.

You do realize its a DC: 40 check to know the square of an invisible creature? What level were you?

Besides, the wizard can still use anklet of tranlocation, and there's heart of water, freedom of movement. A lot of ways to get out of it.

Prodan
2010-05-26, 10:35 AM
Isn't hearing where an invisible creature is an opposed roll?

Boci
2010-05-26, 10:36 AM
Isn't hearing where an invisible creature is an opposed roll?

Yes, but pinpointing their square is a flat DC: 40.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 10:38 AM
You do realize its a DC: 40 check to know the square of an invisible creature? What level were you?

No it's not. You only have to beat the number by 20. The wizard rolled an 8, and I had a 31.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/skills.htm#listen

Boci
2010-05-26, 10:40 AM
No it's not. You only have to beat the number by 20. The wizard rolled an 8, and I had a 31.

Nope. That hearing them. I.e. knowing they are in the area. Knowing excatly where they are is DC: 20.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 10:41 AM
Nope. That hearing them. I.e. knowing they are in the area. Knowing excatly where they are is DC: 20.

Special: A character can use Listen to notice the presence of an invisible creature (generally opposed by a Move Silently check). If the character beats the DC by 20 or more, he or she can pinpoint the location of the invisible creature, though it still maintains total concealment from the character (50% miss chance).

You were saying?

Prodan
2010-05-26, 10:42 AM
INVISIBILITY

A creature can use hearing to find an invisible creature. A character can make a Listen check for this purpose as a free action each round. A Listen check result at least equal to the invisible creature's Move Silently check result reveals its presence. (A creature with no ranks in Move Silently makes a Move Silently check as a Dexterity check to which an armor check penalty applies.) A successful check lets a character hear an invisible creature “over there somewhere.” It's practically impossible to pinpoint the location of an invisible creature. A Listen check that beats the DC by 20 pinpoints the invisible creature's location.

Table: Listen Check DCs to Detect Invisible Creatures
Invisible Creature Is . . . DC
In combat or speaking 0
Moving at half speed Move Silently check result
Moving at full speed Move Silently check result –4
Running or charging Move Silently check result –20
Some distance away +1 per 10 feet
Behind an obstacle (door) +5
Behind an obstacle (stone wall) +15

Boci
2010-05-26, 10:42 AM
Special: A character can use Listen to notice the presence of an invisible creature (generally opposed by a Move Silently check). If the character beats the DC by 20 or more, he or she can pinpoint the location of the invisible creature, though it still maintains total concealment from the character (50% miss chance).

You were saying?

Rule compedulum says otherwise and it overules everything before it. It clarifies the contradictions of core reguarding locating an invisible creature.

Prodan
2010-05-26, 10:45 AM
Rule compedulum says otherwise and it overules everything before it.

I reject your reality and substitute my own.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 10:45 AM
Rules compendium says the same thing. It only needs +40 to use spot, not listen.

"A Listen check result at least equal to the invisible
creature’s Move Silently check result reveals that creature’s
presence. A successful check lets an observer hear an invisible
creature “over there somewhere.” A Listen check that beats
the DC by 20 pinpoints the invisible creature’s location, but
the invisible creature still benefits from total concealment."

It's page 76, if you're curious. I love how they made everything easy to find in that book. So much better than the Players handbook. That confuses me sometimes.

Prodan
2010-05-26, 10:47 AM
More specifically, on the Rules Compendium, page 76, it says in full with regards to Listen:

Listen
An observer can use hearing to fi nd an invisible target that is making any sound by making a Listen check as a free action each round. A Listen check result at least equal to the invisible creature’s Move Silently check result reveals that creature’s presence. A successful check lets an observer hear an invisible creature “over there somewhere.” A Listen check that beats the DC by 20 pinpoints the invisible creature’s location, but the invisible creature still benefi ts from total concealment.
In the case of an invisible object, the DM sets the DC to hear that object according to the Listen skill (see page 114).
Listen to Detect Invisible Creatures
Invisible Creature Is . . . DC
In combat or speaking 0
Moving at up to half speed Move Silently check result
Moving at more than Move Silently check result –5
half speed
Running or charging Move Silently check result –20
Some distance away +1 per 10 feet
Behind an obstacle (door) +5
Behind an obstacle +15
(stone wall)

Boci
2010-05-26, 10:52 AM
Okay, thanks for clarifying that. Sorry, my mistake. The fact is though that melee is still at a disadvantage due to their lack of options. There are still 2 spells and 1 cheap magic item that makes grappling ineffective.
So yes, as melee you can increase your chances against a wizard byplanning, but you will never match their versatility.

Prodan
2010-05-26, 10:53 AM
*Casts Celerity to prevent being ninja'd for a third time.*

candycorn
2010-05-26, 10:54 AM
Well, sheesh, if I wanted to be versatile, I'd be a rogue.

Boci
2010-05-26, 10:54 AM
*Casts Celerity to prevent being ninja'd for a third time.*

You're flat footed, you cannot take immediate actions.


Well, sheesh, if I wanted to be versatile, I'd be a rogue.

How can a rogue match the versatility of a wizard?

The situation you described above would have been ruined if the wizard had spent 1.3k on an anklet of translocation. Versatility is important.

Greenish
2010-05-26, 11:29 AM
Grapple Rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#grapple). Please highlight, for my edification, the section that says you can pin on the same round you initiate a grapple.Woudn't it be the "If your base attack bonus allows you multiple attacks, you can attempt one of these actions in place of each of your attacks, but at successively lower base attack bonuses"?

Amphetryon
2010-05-26, 11:50 AM
Woudn't it be the "If your base attack bonus allows you multiple attacks, you can attempt one of these actions in place of each of your attacks, but at successively lower base attack bonuses"?

Please note that her grapple was made as part of Flurry of Blows. "A monk must use a full attack action to strike with a flurry of blows." So, her full attack action's already used up, she used Travel Devotion to move as a Swift Action... which action was used for the Pin?

Flickerdart
2010-05-26, 11:50 AM
Woudn't it be the "If your base attack bonus allows you multiple attacks, you can attempt one of these actions in place of each of your attacks, but at successively lower base attack bonuses"?
Flurry is not a base attack bonus.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 11:59 AM
I was level 11. I used flurry.

Attack 1 missed.
Attack 2 hit. I dealt damage. I have some feat that let me do a grapple when I hit with my punch or with my sai, scorpion something or other. I succeeded.
Attack 3 pinned.

I was told by the game master that i did everything right. Did I make a mistake?

Amphetryon
2010-05-26, 12:08 PM
I was level 11. I used flurry.

Attack 1 missed.
Attack 2 hit. I dealt damage. I have some feat that let me do a grapple when I hit with my punch or with my sai, scorpion something or other. I succeeded.
Attack 3 pinned.

I was told by the game master that i did everything right. Did I make a mistake?
You did say your GM is your boyfriend, if I'm not misunderstanding you? Sounds like less a 'mistake' and more a 'special circumstance', though it's possible the GM was simply not fully versed on the Grapple rules and making an on-the-fly ruling.

AstralFire
2010-05-26, 12:08 PM
You did say your GM is your boyfriend, if I'm not misunderstanding you? Sounds like less a 'mistake' and more a 'special circumstance', though it's possible the GM was simply not fully versed on the Grapple rules and making an on-the-fly ruling.

Low blow. Really low blow. :|

Reynard
2010-05-26, 12:11 PM
You did say your GM is your boyfriend, if I'm not misunderstanding you? Sounds like less a 'mistake' and more a 'special circumstance', though it's possible the GM was simply not fully versed on the Grapple rules and making an on-the-fly ruling.

Or it was a decision based on someone playing a Monk, to try and help them out. It's not exactly an overpowered addition to the grapple rules.

Amphetryon
2010-05-26, 12:16 PM
Low blow. Really low blow. :|
It was not intended as such, which is why I added the possibility of the on-the-fly ruling when not fully versed in Grapple rules.

If offense was taken, I apologize.

Telonius
2010-05-26, 12:20 PM
Stepping back a bit, and assuming that everything is absolutely kosher as far as the rules go...

You had a 50% miss chance to initiate the grapple. You also had a 50% miss chance to pin the wizard (since he still had concealment). That means you only had a 25% (56.25% if you have Blind-Fight) chance of being able to pull that move off, even before factoring in your attack vs. the Wizard's AC, the odds that you'd be able to beat the Wizard's move silently check by 20, or the odds that you'd win initiative to be able to do that before the Wizard cast something hideous.

Put simply, you got real lucky. Yes, it is possible for a non-paranoid, non-Tippyverse wizard to be tackled by a Monk. That does not mean it's likely, or that there's balance, or that it will turn out well in the rounds after that. (Silent Dimension Door is one of the standard "Get me out of here!" spells that most Wizards get as soon as they can cast 5th-level spells ... which they do at level 9).

Flickerdart
2010-05-26, 12:25 PM
Stepping back a bit, and assuming that everything is absolutely kosher as far as the rules go...

You had a 50% miss chance to initiate the grapple. You also had a 50% miss chance to pin the wizard (since he still had concealment). That means you only had a 25% (56.25% if you have Blind-Fight) chance of being able to pull that move off, even before factoring in your attack vs. the Wizard's AC, the odds that you'd be able to beat the Wizard's move silently check by 20, or the odds that you'd win initiative to be able to do that before the Wizard cast something hideous.

Put simply, you got real lucky. Yes, it is possible for a non-paranoid, non-Tippyverse wizard to be tackled by a Monk. That does not mean it's likely, or that there's balance, or that it will turn out well in the rounds after that. (Silent Dimension Door is one of the standard "Get me out of here!" spells that most Wizards get as soon as they can cast 5th-level spells ... which they do at level 9).
And if you do mess up the attempt, you've run out of Travel Devotion for the day, so you can't just try again if the Wizard decides to leave, which he will because he has nothing else to do with his move action.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 12:26 PM
You did say your GM is your boyfriend, if I'm not misunderstanding you? Sounds like less a 'mistake' and more a 'special circumstance', though it's possible the GM was simply not fully versed on the Grapple rules and making an on-the-fly ruling.

No, my boyfriend helped me make my character. He's playing the barbarian-rogue.

And I didn't think that invisible miss chance counted for grapple rolls to pin?

Also, wizards have low AC usually. No more than 18 or 20, usually.

I did miss the first attack to invisible. I hit the second. That's not that lucky. I won the opposed grapple, and pinned him. He couldn't escape.

Later that round, the barbarian-rogue charged him and hit him with nearly a half dozen sneak attacks with short swords.

Boci
2010-05-26, 12:28 PM
Later that round, the barbarian-rogue charged him and hit him with nearly a half dozen sneak attacks with short swords.

Against an invisible opponent?

candycorn
2010-05-26, 12:30 PM
Against an invisible opponent?

He had a scout's headband. He saw invisible things.

Flickerdart
2010-05-26, 12:30 PM
No, my boyfriend helped me make my character. He's playing the barbarian-rogue.

And I didn't think that invisible miss chance counted for grapple rolls to pin?

Also, wizards have low AC usually. No more than 18 or 20, usually.

I did miss the first attack to invisible. I hit the second. That's not that lucky. I won the opposed grapple, and pinned him. He couldn't escape.

Later that round, the barbarian-rogue charged him and hit him with nearly a half dozen sneak attacks with short swords.
You also had to win initiative, roll well on your Listen check, and find a Wizard stupid enough to be standing on the ground without defensive spells up (Shield, Mage Armor and such can jack it sky-high, and by lvl 11 Overland Flight that lasts all day is a common spell). He could also have been an Abjurer, in which case Abrupt Jaunt would render your plan worthless.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-26, 12:31 PM
No, my boyfriend helped me make my character. He's playing the barbarian-rogue.

And I didn't think that invisible miss chance counted for grapple rolls to pin?

Also, wizards have low AC usually. No more than 18 or 20, usually.

I did miss the first attack to invisible. I hit the second. That's not that lucky. I won the opposed grapple, and pinned him. He couldn't escape.

Later that round, the barbarian-rogue charged him and hit him with nearly a half dozen sneak attacks with short swords.

Having now read some test of spite matches, I think you are wrong on a lot of counts here. I've seen AC range from 15 to nearly 50 on the arcanists there, and it's worse with the divine casters. Never mind all the stuff on the banlist. I asked about starmantle + evasion and seriously, what? What?

Also, the monkening? Hilarious. God bless Saph!

Besides, I don't think you can pin that way... could you cite for me how you pinned? I'm confused.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 12:35 PM
You also had to win initiative, roll well on your Listen check, and find a Wizard stupid enough to be standing on the ground without defensive spells up (Shield, Mage Armor and such can jack it sky-high, and by lvl 11 Overland Flight that lasts all day is a common spell). He could also have been an Abjurer, in which case Abrupt Jaunt would render your plan worthless.

We were indoors. Flying was a bit hard. I was told he had Mage Armor on, and invisibility.

I had a really good listen check. Really good. I have a 24 wisdom and skill focus in listen, and an item. I have over a +25 to listen, and move silently isn't a wizard skill.

And AC 15-50? That's crazy. I can't imagine that wizards would be walking around 24 hours a day with that many spells on. They'd have no spells left to cast with!

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-26, 12:37 PM
We were indoors. Flying was a bit hard. I was told he had Mage Armor on, and invisibility.

I had a really good listen check. Really good. I have a 24 wisdom and skill focus in listen, and an item. I have over a +25 to listen, and move silently isn't a wizard skill.

That's.... a lot of resources for listen. Like, a lot.
Listen's pretty situational. There are DC increments for range, being distracted, all sorts of things. Though, I did see one guy abusing the range modifier to actually find where someone was. That was weird and sort of painful to watch.

Well, it may be crazy, but I have seen it now, and I wish I hadn't. Hard to argue with empirical evidence I guess. They seemed to be casting pretty handily.....

candycorn
2010-05-26, 12:38 PM
Wisdom also gave me armor class, and I used it for ranged attack with zen archery. It gave me listen and spot. I got a lot with it.

After that? Monks get a lot of skill points, and the item was only 50gp!

Greenish
2010-05-26, 12:40 PM
Please note that her grapple was made as part of Flurry of Blows. "A monk must use a full attack action to strike with a flurry of blows." So, her full attack action's already used up, she used Travel Devotion to move as a Swift Action... which action was used for the Pin?Ah, I assumed that you were talking about grapple in general.

[Edit]:
And AC 15-50? That's crazy. I can't imagine that wizards would be walking around 24 hours a day with that many spells on. They'd have no spells left to cast with!Well, the guidelines (For being Batman!) suggest that you use about a quarter of your spell slots on personal defense. Of course, in ToS it might easily be more.

Bitter Iocus
2010-05-26, 12:41 PM
Wisdom also gave me armor class, and I used it for ranged attack with zen archery. It gave me listen and spot. I got a lot with it.

After that? Monks get a lot of skill points, and the item was only 50gp!

So, I just think that this sounds like an extremely borderline case. You grappled and pinned one wizard, who had no contingencies, no immediate action spells, no still spells, nothing. That's really rare! I've been looking at 3rd party adventures, at the ToS stuff, and it's just not common.

And I'm still not clear how you pinned, but the grapple rules never made any sense to me. Oh and heart of water looks like it's a level two spell with a pretty solid duration.... That kills grapplers.

Boci
2010-05-26, 12:41 PM
Wisdom also gave me armor class, and I used it for ranged attack with zen archery. It gave me listen and spot. I got a lot with it.

After that? Monks get a lot of skill points, and the item was only 50gp!

Feats are valuable though.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 12:44 PM
Feats are valuable though.

Yeah, but even if I hadn't, I did about 1/3 of the wizard's life in damage, and was able to get in position for flanking.

I guess the wizard banned evocation. I'm not sure if that was a good or bad thing for the wizard, but I think that's probably what happened.

Greenish
2010-05-26, 12:45 PM
Feats are valuable though.What, are you seriously trying to suggest that some monks don't take Skill Focus: Listen?

:smallwink:

Boci
2010-05-26, 12:47 PM
Yeah, but even if I hadn't, I did about 1/3 of the wizard's life in damage, and was able to get in position for flanking.

I guess the wizard banned evocation. I'm not sure if that was a good or bad thing for the wizard, but I think that's probably what happened.

How does any of that relate to the "most people do not consider skill focus a good feat"?

Flickerdart
2010-05-26, 12:47 PM
Yeah, but even if I hadn't, I did about 1/3 of the wizard's life in damage, and was able to get in position for flanking.

I guess the wizard banned evocation. I'm not sure if that was a good or bad thing for the wizard, but I think that's probably what happened.
Banning evocation doesn't really affect the Wizard's competence. Evocation spells are by and large useless.

Prodan
2010-05-26, 12:48 PM
And I'm still not clear how you pinned, but the grapple rules never made any sense to me. Oh and heart of water looks like it's a level two spell with a pretty solid duration.... That kills grapplers.

Third level.



After that? Monks get a lot of skill points, and the item was only 50gp!

4 skill points/level is not a "lot", and a masterwork tool of Listen... while it exists, I have an image of a monk charging into battle with two ear horns, one in each ear.

AstralFire
2010-05-26, 12:48 PM
That's really rare! I've been looking at 3rd party adventures, at the ToS stuff, and it's just not common.

It's not really that rare at all. The game populace is split up in three ways regarding wizards:
- People who play them like the archetype they are supposed to be emulating because they don't know any better. Lots of blaster spells, anything with an xp cost is to be shied away from and used with great hesitation, little to no crafting.
- People who play them like the archetype they are supposed to be emulating because they enjoy it more (either for balance purposes or because being wizardly just starts to look like work to them.)
- People who play them really, brutally effectively.

The third is far outnumbered by the first two -except- in dedicated hobbyist forums, which is why most newbies who come here - you are a big exception - argue for a long time against the effectiveness of spellcasters.


Banning evocation doesn't really affect the Wizard's competence. Evocation spells are by and large useless.

Contingency.

Flickerdart
2010-05-26, 12:50 PM
Contingency.
Craft Contingent Spell.

AstralFire
2010-05-26, 12:50 PM
Craft Contingent Spell.

Was such a terrible idea, but conceded.

Greenish
2010-05-26, 12:54 PM
Banning evocation doesn't really affect the Wizard's competence. Evocation spells are by and large useless.Evocation spells aren't useless, per se, but HP damage which most of them do (though many of them have additional effects) is less useful than other types of spells, the school doesn't have anything that can't be replicated by spells from other schools, and the same effects from evocation spells can be achieved by spells from other schools (looking at you, orbs).

So, evocation isn't a bad school, the others just tend to be better.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 12:55 PM
Can craft contingent spell be used for non wizards too?


4 skill points/level is not a "lot", and a masterwork tool of Listen... while it exists, I have an image of a monk charging into battle with two ear horns, one in each ear.

Hee. You're funny.

Prodan
2010-05-26, 12:56 PM
Can craft contingent spell be used for non wizards too?

You can craft a contingent spell to be placed on someone else, but you have to be a spellcaster of some sort to craft one in the first place.

Greenish
2010-05-26, 12:56 PM
Can craft contingent spell be used for non wizards too?Yeah. It requires CL 11 and can only be used with spells you know, though.

Boci
2010-05-26, 12:57 PM
Can craft contingent spell be used for non wizards too?

Nope. They wouldn't meet the preq and would not have any spells to use.

Edit: Assuming you mean non-casters.

candycorn
2010-05-26, 12:59 PM
Nope. They wouldn't meet the preq and would not have any spells to use.

Edit: Assuming you mean non-casters.

No. I mean that all the other craft feats make items. The wizard that makes a +3 greatsword doesn't usually use it himself, right? Can that be done for craft contingent? Can they be bought and crafted for other people?

Boci
2010-05-26, 12:59 PM
No. I mean that all the other craft feats make items. The wizard that makes a +3 greatsword doesn't usually use it himself, right? Can that be done for craft contingent? Can they be bought and crafted for other people?

No, it for yourself only.

The Cat Goddess
2010-05-26, 01:01 PM
You also had to win initiative, roll well on your Listen check, and find a Wizard stupid enough to be standing on the ground without defensive spells up (Shield, Mage Armor and such can jack it sky-high, and by lvl 11 Overland Flight that lasts all day is a common spell). He could also have been an Abjurer, in which case Abrupt Jaunt would render your plan worthless.

Shield & Mage Armor don't help with Touch AC... but we'll ignore that because she was using straight attacks and a Feat that emulates Improved Grab. Even with Shield, Mage Armor & a Dex of 18, that's still only a 22 AC... call it 24-26 with Ring of Protection & Amulet of Natural Armor.

When a Wizard gets an 8 on Move Silently, that indicates that he rolled really badly and doesn't have a great Dex to begin with. Beating that with a 24 Wisdom and even 10 skill points in Listen (you've already got it beat by 9) is not hard. In a non-point-buy game with good stats (2d6+6, 4d6 drop lowest), spending skill points in Spot & Listen for a Monk is practically a given.

Assuming the guy has Abrupt Jaunt (a very, very specific ability and not very common at all) is even cheesier than Pinning on the same round you Grapple when you're flurrying.

Heart of Water is not exactly a commonly known spell, given that it's not in the PH or SpC.

Lastly... Virtually every Wizard in a published module or sourcebook is very sub-optimized and usually only has spells from the PH or the book they're in, if that book includes new spells.

Assuming every Wizard is as optimized as you can make it clearly goes against RAI from published modules.

Lastly... the Heroes are supposed to win, unless they do something really dumb. That's what RPing a Heroic character means.

Telonius
2010-05-26, 01:10 PM
Lastly... the Heroes are supposed to win, unless they do something really dumb. That's what RPing a Heroic character means.
http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/0909/now-you-see-demotivational-poster-1253722246.jpg

(Sorry, had to. :smallbiggrin:)

The Cat Goddess
2010-05-26, 01:13 PM
But I covered that with "unless they do something dumb". :smallwink:

Prodan
2010-05-26, 01:14 PM
Lastly... the Heroes are supposed to win, unless they do something really dumb.

Like trying to fight a wizard? :smallwink:

The Cat Goddess
2010-05-26, 01:17 PM
Like trying to fight a wizard? :smallwink:

Uh, no.

Like trying to fight against Pun-Pun? Or fighting against "I've got every spell and metamagic feat in the book, because I'm a Wizard!" guy?

Sorry, that's clearly not RAI.

Prodan
2010-05-26, 01:19 PM
Sorry, that's clearly not RAI.

That word you keep using. I do not think it means what you think it means.