PDA

View Full Version : This question again? Really?



Os1ris09
2010-06-19, 11:57 PM
So I know how 3.5 spellcasters that get full casting and versatility are better than a straight fighter. But how do you show that they are just from text instead of application?

Reason I ask is because I got into a debate with my DM on how the ToB gave a fresh breath to melee oriented characters and how it isn't overpowered and he believes that it is. I tried to tell him that spell casters such as the druid,cleric,wizard,sorcerer,archivist, and maybe the artificer to an extent are more powerful than any fighter,swashbuckler,ranger,paladin, etc. with equal optimization and he still doesn't agree with me.

Pink
2010-06-20, 12:08 AM
If a person is stubborn about something, not a whole lot you can do about it. People aren't necessarily as logical as we'd like to believe we are, even with silly things like games.

faceroll
2010-06-20, 12:09 AM
Well, ask him to come up with a problem, then ask for source books and any house rules regarding specific spells (polymorph any object, shivering touch, how illusions work, etc), then build a druid/cleric/wizard of the lowest possible level that can bypass the problem.

AslanCross
2010-06-20, 12:09 AM
Spells all scale with level in some way: range, damage, duration, etc. Martial maneuvers do not. Mountain Hammer will forever deal 2d6 damage.

Spells are far more versatile and can accomplish anything that nonmagical classes can do. Maneuvers deal damage. With the exception of White Raven and a few boosts, most maneuvers consist of dealing damage.

dextercorvia
2010-06-20, 12:17 AM
Ask him which one of the fighter's bonus feats allow him to step across the universe, give himself a +6 on all of his saves, take an extra standard or full round action (at any time), make him unable to be surprised, double his movement speed, delay someone trying to teleport to his location, etc. Then ask him what a fighter is good at. The answer should be damaging stuff. Show him that wizards or other full casters can do that, too.

Jarian
2010-06-20, 12:22 AM
While the above suggestions might (might. People can be really stubborn when they want to be) make your DM reconsider his stance on things, it's just as likely to make him tell you to roll a commoner if you want to optimize something to the point that it's "better than a fighter". No, I don't know where this mentality comes from, but it happens. All too often, really.

A better solution, I would think, would be to work with what you've been given - maybe after handing your DM a bullet point list of the things wizards can do, then a simple, nonconfrontational question about how a fighter is supposed to compete.

DragoonWraith
2010-06-20, 12:25 AM
If he brings up the spells/day limitation, have him tell you how many spells/day the Wizard actually gets at, say, level 13 (answer: 26). Then show how you can defeat an entire encounter using just one of these each. Your 7th level spell can do it. Your two 6th level spells can do it. Your three 5th level spells can do it. Your four 4th level spells can do it. Your 3rd level spells are going to have a hard time, but can still probably do more than the average 13th level Fighter.

The average recommended adventuring day is 4 encounters. If you really aren't careful, you might burn four spells at each - 16 spells. You still have 10 in reserve, and unless you're an idiot at least one or two will still be capable of single-handedly ending encounters.

If he's still not convinced, point out Teleport. Greater, if you like. Or hell, just Rope Trick.

Ravens_cry
2010-06-20, 12:26 AM
This question is stupid. Yes, Wizards and other Full casters are more versatile then Fighters. But in most games, it doesn't really matter, As long as everyone is having fun, none of this Tier BS is important.
If swinging a big piece of metal is your kind of game, more power to ya.
If making the universe your feminine canine is how you have fun, good for you.
This is D&D. This is roleplaying.
If you're grinning, you're winning.

PId6
2010-06-20, 12:28 AM
it's just as likely to make him tell you to roll a commoner if you want to optimize something to the point that it's "better than a fighter".
And that's when you bust out Chicken-infested! :smallamused:

DragoonWraith
2010-06-20, 12:29 AM
Except if the DM is arbitrarily and without full understanding of the situation banning a very well written and fun book, it makes sense for a player to try to explain things. Like that Tome of Battle is by-far the most balanced book written for 3.5. Or that the Player's Handbook was the least balanced book for 3.5. Or how Martial Adepts can't even come close to the tricks spellcasters can pull.

Vaynor
2010-06-20, 12:30 AM
Tell him about the druid. Is he familiar with the fighter? Ok, the druid gets one of those. Is he familiar with the wizard? They get spells almost as powerful as that. Is he familiar with large, dangerous creatures? Druids get to be those while they cast spells.

Fighters get Power Attack and Weapon Focus. I think it's obvious enough.

dextercorvia
2010-06-20, 12:31 AM
A lot of people who think ToB is overpowered have only really seen it in arena fights. PvP it makes a big difference.

Doc Roc
2010-06-20, 02:09 AM
A lot of people who think ToB is overpowered have only really seen it in arena fights. PvP it makes a big difference.

Then they've seen the wrong arena fights. Win rates for ToB against Casters in ToS are... not great.

PId6
2010-06-20, 02:11 AM
Then they've seen the wrong arena fights. Win rates for ToB against Casters in ToS are... not great.
Maybe you should start allowing Iron Heart Surge then? I'm sure the win rates would get better if martial adepts are allowed to Surge away the opposition.

ZeroNumerous
2010-06-20, 02:12 AM
Maybe you should start allowing Iron Heart Surge then? I'm sure the win rates would get better if martial adepts are allowed to Surge away the opposition.

Or the Sun. Or the planet. Or gravity. Or even Surge away magic itself.

balistafreak
2010-06-20, 02:15 AM
I'm not sure that's a measure of the power of ToB or the hilariously ambiguous wording of Iron Heart Surge.

Ravens_cry
2010-06-20, 02:18 AM
I'm not sure that's a measure of the power of ToB or the hilariously ambiguous wording of Iron Heart Surge.
Or the measure of a tired old meme, because IHS does not work that way.

PId6
2010-06-20, 02:21 AM
Or the measure of a tired old meme, because IHS does not work that way.
I Surge away your pessimism.

Another_Poet
2010-06-20, 02:22 AM
Instead of arguing with him, I would just ask him if he would let you do a ToB character for just a few sessions. Promise that after, say, 3 sessions if he still believes you are OP you will retire the character (with suitable segue) and bring in a character using the usual source books he allows.

In general, seeing is believing. Two sessions with a ToB character and he won't find anything to gripe about. They fit in nicely.

ap

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-06-20, 02:23 AM
Instead of arguing with him, I would just ask him if he would let you do a ToB character for just a few sessions. Promise that after, say, 3 sessions if he still believes you are OP you will retire the character (with suitable segue) and bring in a character using the usual source books he allows.

In general, seeing is believing. Two sessions with a ToB character and he won't find anything to gripe about. They fit in nicely.

apThey fit in nicely unless your group is incredibly low-op. Then again, Druids don't fit nicely in incredibly low-op groups, either.

Which leads me to believe that you should test-play a ToB character and get a buddy to play a Druid. Have the Druid one-up you every step of the way. This way you're showing how ToB isn't broken without taking away anyone else's spotlight.

balistafreak
2010-06-20, 02:30 AM
Or the measure of a tired old meme, because IHS does not work that way.

You define "effect or other condition" and "duration" then. :smalltongue: While they appear all over the SRD, they are never fully defined themselves.

That's two words that have no RAW translation into a D&D term. Admittedly, there's a list of conditions, but then that gets even more preposterous - now you can IHS away an effect that makes you unconscious, because you by all that is said in the "unconscious" entry technically do not lose your actions. Better yet, IHS away a grapple condition. The list goes on...

And all because the defined parameters for IHS are unfortunately quite undefined themselves. :smallannoyed:


In general, seeing is believing. Two sessions with a ToB character and he won't find anything to gripe about. They fit in nicely.

Only if the table is at least moderately optimized. If you've got Weapon Specializing Fighters and healbot Clerics, ToB will rip them a new one and rightfully be called overpowered for the group. :smallannoyed:

Ravens_cry
2010-06-20, 02:38 AM
You define "effect or other condition" and "duration" then. :smalltongue: While they appear all over the SRD, they are never fully defined themselves.

Condition is defined, with a glossary (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm).

PId6
2010-06-20, 02:52 AM
Condition is defined, with a glossary (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm).
But "Effect" is not.

sofawall
2010-06-20, 02:56 AM
Key difference between Warblades and fighters. Warblades have a much higher optimization floor, despite having a similar (but slightly lower) ceiling.

Similar to Druids having a very high floor, and wizards having one of the lowest floors ever printed, despite also having arguably the highest ceiling. Certainly higher than Druid, anyway.

Vaynor
2010-06-20, 03:53 AM
I'd like to point out that "death" is a defined condition and technically does not hinder the use of maneuvers.

So you don't even need to take the word "effect" liberally, the "condition" part already applies directly to death.

olentu
2010-06-20, 03:56 AM
I'd like to point out that "death" is a defined condition and technically does not hinder the use of maneuvers.

Well aside from the possible unconsciousness it does not really hinder anything does it so why bother removing it.

Vaynor
2010-06-20, 03:56 AM
Well aside from the possible unconsciousness it does not really hinder anything does it so why bother removing it.

Meh, no healing can be a bit annoying. Also technically you're only unconscious at -1 to -9 hp.

olentu
2010-06-20, 04:01 AM
Meh, no healing can be a bit annoying. Also technically you're only unconscious at -1 to -9 hp.

Eh I was talking about the assertion that some make being that one always has at the least 0 nonlethal damage which was of course why I said possible unconsciousness.

Vaynor
2010-06-20, 04:04 AM
Oh, yes, nonlethal damage could do that. But then all you'd need to do is IHS again to remove the unconsciousness (which only makes you helpless, as "knocked out" is not a defined condition). You'd probably want to IHS out of unconsciousness first though, that way you could recover IHS to get rid of death.

ZeroNumerous
2010-06-20, 04:05 AM
Condition is defined, with a glossary (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm).

See, that opens a whole new can of worms. I.E: Pick up Diehard, get knocked to -4 and use IHS. You then IHS away Dying.

What if I'm a ghost? Can I IHS away Incorporeality?

If I'm a tiny weak birdling being blown around by a strong wind, can I IHS the Blown Away condition?

Will tearing your eyes out(and thus making you Blinded) allow you to IHS away the Blinded condition or magically regrow your eyes?

Heliomance
2010-06-20, 04:06 AM
I'd like to point out that "death" is a defined condition and technically does not hinder the use of maneuvers.

So you don't even need to take the word "effect" liberally, the "condition" part already applies directly to death.

This got shot down years ago. It goes like this:

In case it matters, a dead character, no matter how she died, has -10 hit points.

Certain attacks deal nonlethal damage. Other effects, such as heat or being exhausted, also deal nonlethal damage. When you take nonlethal damage, keep a running total of how much you’ve accumulated. Do not deduct the nonlethal damage number from your current hit points. It is not "real" damage. Instead, when your nonlethal damage equals your current hit points, you’re staggered, and when it exceeds your current hit points, you fall unconscious. It doesn’t matter whether the nonlethal damage equals or exceeds your current hit points because the nonlethal damage has gone up or because your current hit points have gone down.
As -10<0, we then fall unconcious.

When your nonlethal damage exceeds your current hit points,
you fall unconscious. While unconscious, you are helpless.

A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (-5 modifier).

Dexterity 0 means that the character cannot move at all.

Vaynor
2010-06-20, 04:07 AM
As long as you're not paralyzed. One of the only conditions that actually says you can't act when it should be obvious.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-06-20, 04:08 AM
So what you're saying is that you have to re-word two level 3 maneuvers (White Raven Tactics) and the entire book is salvageable. Well, that's too much work, obviously. ToB must stay banned!

ZeroNumerous
2010-06-20, 04:08 AM
As long as you're not paralyzed. One of the only conditions that actually says you can't act when it should be obvious.

By RAW, Vaynor is correct.

By even the tiniest iota of common sense ever: This is obviously wrong.


So what you're saying is that you have to re-word two level 3 maneuvers (White Raven Tactics) and the entire book is salvageable. Well, that's too much work, obviously. ToB must stay banned!

To be fair: He does have a valid complaint if, and only if, his group is reliant on clerics being healbots, druids being healbots, fighters being awesome and sorcerer/wizards evoking.

Sliver
2010-06-20, 04:09 AM
Eh I was talking about the assertion that some make being that one always has at the least 0 nonlethal damage which was of course why I said possible unconsciousness.

While this is an argument to the "Death doesn't prevent you taking actions", it means that Diehard means nothing, since you still have less HP than non-lethal damage and it only effects the dying condition.

Vaynor
2010-06-20, 04:11 AM
This got shot down years ago. It goes like this:

Where does it say that IHS requires movement? (honestly curious not trying to be argumentative).


By RAW, Vaynor is correct.

By even the tiniest iota of common sense ever: This is obviously wrong.

Oh, of course, I'm not suggesting anyone actually use it this way.

olentu
2010-06-20, 04:11 AM
Oh, yes, nonlethal damage could do that. But then all you'd need to do is IHS again to remove the unconsciousness (which only makes you helpless, as "knocked out" is not a defined condition). You'd probably want to IHS out of unconsciousness first though, that way you could recover IHS to get rid of death.

Yes so as I said aside from a possible complication stemming from unconsciousness why bother removing the condition.


Edit: Tome of battle page 38 has maneuvers requirement of movement to be initiated.

ZeroNumerous
2010-06-20, 04:17 AM
So basically all you need is some way to be immune to Non-lethal. Be a Warforged Warblade 6 with Improved Resiliency.

Vaynor
2010-06-20, 04:19 AM
Yes so as I said aside from a possible complication stemming from unconsciousness why bother removing the condition.


Edit: Tome of battle page 38 has maneuvers requirement of movement to be initiated.

Gotcha, so as long as you're not unconscious (and thus helpless) you're fine. The SRD states that you're only unconscious when you reach -1 to -9 hp (you fall unconscious), but if you are no longer at -1 to -9 hp (or, dying), you are assumed to be no longer unconscious (otherwise going above -1 would render you still unconscious). This means that when not dying (-1 to -9 hp) you are conscious. So, at -10 hp, you are no longer unconscious. You are, however, dead. Which the creators assumed to be worse than unconsciousness, but unfortunately never declared it as such.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-06-20, 04:20 AM
To be fair: He does have a valid complaint if, and only if, his group is reliant on clerics being healbots, druids being healbots, fighters being awesome and sorcerer/wizards evoking.At least in my experience, Druids are just overpowered out of the box. You have to know what you're doing just to make them crappy. Even if you never Wildshape, don't take Natural Spell, and your Animal Companion is a Tucan, the spontaneous SNA for 1d3 crocodiles is staring you right in the face.

olentu
2010-06-20, 04:23 AM
Gotcha, so as long as you're not unconscious it's fine. The SRD states that you're only unconscious when you reach -1 to -9 hp (you fall unconscious), but if you are no longer at -1 to -9 hp (or, dying), you are assumed to be no longer unconscious (otherwise going above -1 would render you still unconscious). This means that when not dying (-1 to -9 hp) you are conscious. So, at -10 hp, you are no longer unconscious. You are, however, dead. Which the creators assumed to be worse than death, but unfortunately never declared it as such.

Er as I said some people assert that a character always has at the least 0 nonlethal damage. Thus by that argument since -10 < 0 one is unconscious when dead.

ZeroNumerous
2010-06-20, 04:26 AM
At least in my experience, Druids are just overpowered out of the box.

My statement about "druids being healbots" addresses that issue.

Sure, they're really overpowered if you actually bother to cast non-heal spells, but I've played with druids who prep nothing but Cure [X] Wounds and never cast anything else.

Vaynor
2010-06-20, 04:29 AM
You fall unconscious when you go below 0 health, not because of nonlethal damage but because of the dying mechanics. If that were the case then there would be no need to stipulate that you fall unconscious at -1. When you have not taken any nonlethal damage you do not have a value equal to 0, you simply do not have any nonlethal damage at all.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-06-20, 04:33 AM
My statement about "druids being healbots" addresses that issue.

Sure, they're really overpowered if you actually bother to cast non-heal spells, but I've played with druids who prep nothing but Cure [X] Wounds and never cast anything else.I was contesting the likelihood of this scenario, not ignoring it. At any point, the player of that Druid could convert a prepared Cure spell into an appropriately-leveled SNA. You literally have to ignore class features to avoid being overpowered. That would be like a Warblade who never used Stances.

olentu
2010-06-20, 04:36 AM
You fall unconscious when you go below 0 health, not because of nonlethal damage but because of the dying mechanics. If that were the case then there would be no need to stipulate that you fall unconscious at -1. When you have not taken any nonlethal damage you do not have a value equal to 0, you simply do not have any nonlethal damage at all.

That is fine but it does not change what I have seen people assert and thus what I was referring to.


However I do wonder why you care to note that such an interpretation would make a section of the rules unnecessary. That is of no account in determining what is correct and thus would seem to be unnecessary. But I suppose it could be a aesthetic choice.

ZeroNumerous
2010-06-20, 04:36 AM
I was contesting the likelihood of this scenario, not ignoring it.

And yet, players have done it before. It probably stems from the same issue of evoker-play. Doing more damage/healing provides a direct and tangible benefit, and some people will choose not to do other things.

Vaynor
2010-06-20, 04:37 AM
That is fine but it does not change what I have seen people assert and thus what I was referring to.


However I do wonder why you care to note that such an interpretation would make a section of the rules unnecessary. That is of no account in determining what is correct and thus would seem to be unnecessary. But I suppose it could be a aesthetic choice.

I understand your purpose, I was merely remarking on the rules. :smallsmile:

olentu
2010-06-20, 04:43 AM
I understand your purpose, I was merely remarking on the rules. :smallsmile:

I suppose if one does not mind distracting from the subject of why to bother.

Greenish
2010-06-20, 07:25 AM
And yet, players have done it before. It probably stems from the same issue of evoker-play. Doing more damage/healing provides a direct and tangible benefit, and some people will choose not to do other things.I bet if one tried, making a useless ToB character should be possible. Archery warblade with strikes for all maneuvers selected?

Fitz10019
2010-06-20, 10:41 AM
I was tempted to complain about the Iron Heart Surge derail, but it fits the OP's title perfectly.

dextercorvia
2010-06-20, 09:49 PM
Then they've seen the wrong arena fights. Win rates for ToB against Casters in ToS are... not great.

Sorry, I should have been clearer, I was thinking about several gestalt arenas I used to frequent. Most of the best options had some amount of ToB (usually some kind of full caster//ToB 'gish'). If someone is used to seeing underpowered wizards, and then suddenly you see a wizard with ToB eating a full attack from a charger build, and then taking them out the next round, it is easy to blame ToB.

Wonton
2010-06-20, 11:15 PM
Key difference between Warblades and fighters. Warblades have a much higher optimization floor, despite having a similar (but slightly lower) ceiling.

Similar to Druids having a very high floor, and wizards having one of the lowest floors ever printed, despite also having arguably the highest ceiling. Certainly higher than Druid, anyway.

Wow. I've never thought of it that way. Did you come up with that? It's clever.

Technically, isn't a Wizard's floor right around the commoner's? Having d4 HD and good Will saves won't help you much if all the spells you've prepared for the day are Detect Secret Doors.

sambo.
2010-06-21, 01:09 AM
....because I got into a debate with my DM......
ok, right there: You Lost the Debate!!111!!!

Os1ris09
2010-06-21, 01:17 AM
ok, right there: You Lost the Debate!!111!!!

How do you lose a debate when you are trying to prove a point and use logic and stuff without actually doing a full on PvP type setting.

I mean my DM doesn't mind that I challenge his views and all as long as I can back them up. I mean the guy practically banned the MIC for crying out loud. Which is bull****** IMHO but he did. So I have been fighting for this guy to allow some level of creativity without banning every darn idea I present. To me its almost no fun anymore and I am about to quit D&D because of it.

Kyeudo
2010-06-21, 02:16 AM
First, you need to establish a definition for overpowered. Your GM's is the one that matters, not your own. If he defines it in terms of damage per round, speed with which you can end an encounter, or in terms of versatility, you can show him how spellcasters are more powerful.

A working Time Stopped Delayed Blast Fireball Nova (faily basic) fries pretty much all but the most optimized ToB tricks in damage. The vast area of AoE debuffs smokes all ToB tricks, since they are almost all single target only, and Wizards have more options than anyone.

Once you have established that Core is broken, he will hopefully be more open to considering non-core stuff to be not-broken.

If he brings up that a Warblade smokes a Fighter in every way possible, tell him that this is the point. Fighers can't do anything but damage. They have no social skills, no mobility, and are best used as a battering ram. Warblades can do something other than damage without failing at damage.