PDA

View Full Version : PEACH - Feat-Equivalent Valuation [3.x]



kestrel404
2010-07-09, 11:31 AM
Feat-Equivalent Valuation (3.x)
To really get into the nuts-and-bolts of why some classes are better than others or why some builds are better than others, we need a constant measuring stick to which we can compare each individual mechanic and determine its utility.
Fortunately, we've already got a reference point whose general usefullness and utility is recognized and can be measured against - the Bonus Feat. While not every feat can (or should) be considdered equal, comparing the bonus you get from various class features against what you can get from a single feat gives us a rough measurement we can apply to literally everything else. Given the wide range of feats available, nearly every mechanic has been enhanced, duplicated, appended to or otherwise given a 'one feat value' somewhere in the published rules. Thus, I propose a system by which we can calculate the number of bonus feats it would take to turn a commoner into any other class - the 'Feat Equivalent Valuation'.

Rules of FEV:

The baseline class of comparison is the commoner. This is because if you use any class other than commoner as a baseline, the commoner ends up with a negative FEV value. The commoner has 1/2 BAB progression, no good saves, 2+int skills, d4 hit dice, no class features, one simple weapon proficiency, and a very minimal skill list. Even a wizard with an Int of 8 is better than a commoner (at least they are profficient with ALL simple weapons, and get a good will save). We will call this FEV of 0.

Any class feature that a class has that is better than the commoner is worth some amount of feats - even if it is only worth a PARTIAL feat. For example, because the Improved Toughness grants you +1 HP/level, and an increase in hit die size (from d4 to d6, etc.) yields an average increase in HP of +1 HP/level, you can considder them roughly equal. However, since the feat itself applies regardless of class, while the class level's HD increase applies only when you take an extra level in that class, the 'bonus feat' should be spread out over all twenty possible levels equally - thus, for each d(+2) by which the classes HD is larger than the commoner's d4, a level in that class is worth 1/20th of a feat (or .05 feats). So, each level of Thief is worth .05 feats from HD, while each level of barbarian is worth .2 extra.

Here are the values for various class elements, and the base feats from which I've drawn these values.

HD Size: +.05/Level/size over d4 - Reason: Improved Toughness

Class Skills: +1 if number of class skills is > 10 - Reason: Able Learner - there are a few skills that add a single skill as a class skill forever, possibly implying that it should be +1 feat per class skill over 10, but while the skill cap is removed by getting a skill as a class skill once, skill costs are still doubled when you are buying out-of-class. Here, the Able Learner feat seems to imply that having class skills should be cheap, feat-wise, and since class skill lists are not often discussed during optimization sessions, I must agree. You'll note that in the PHB classes, both the Median and Mode for # of class skills is 10, with most of those exceeding 10 doing so by a fairly wide margin.

Number of Skill points: +.5/Level/2 over (Int + 2) - Reason: Alertness, etc. - There are many feats that add +2 to 2 skills. So, 4 skill points for 1 feat. First level skill points are not calculated differently for each class, since the first level in a class may not be the first level a player takes. This may be added in seperately if the FEV values are being used for optimization purposes, in which case it's worth 1.5 feats per +2 skill points.

BAB: +1.5/+1 BAB that a commoner does not get - Reason: Weapon Focus - Since weapon focus is a specialized form of +1 BAB (one weapon only, does not increase full attack swings), additional BAB is worth slightly more than 1 feat. This means that Full attack classes get +1.5 feats every odd level, and Rogue attack classes get +1.5 feats at 3rd level and every 4 levels after. If you play with fractional BAB, change this to .75 and .375 per level respectively.

Good Saves: Each good save is equal to +1 feat at first level, and +.5 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels. - Reason: Iron Will, etc. A +2 to one save is worth 1 feat. So every +1 above a poor save is worth half a feat.

Weapon Proficiency: +1 feat for all Simple, +2 for Simple and select Martial/Exotic, +4 for Simple and all Martial. - Reason: Simple Weapon Proficiency - This one feat offers proficiency in a fairly large group of weapons. While Weapon proficiency and Exotic Weapon Proficiency are each weapon-specific, the ability to pick up a large swath of proficiencies with a single feat (or a single class level dip) cheapens the value of weapon proficiency significantly. Also, non-proficiency only causes a -4 penalty to attacks, which could be overcome with at most 4 feats. Of course, proficiencies can only be gained once, so the feat values here may not apply to multiclassing characters.

Armor Proficiency: +1 feat for light, +2 for light & medium, +3 for all, +1 for shields and +2 for tower shields. - Reason: Each of these is a specific proficiency. One might be tempted to discount the 'bulk armor proficiency' you get with some classes, but they are each definitely a feat. Like weapon proficiencies, armor proficiencies only count the first time you get them.

Class features: Every class feature is different, and the feat value must be calculated seperately. This is the hard part. Some rules of thumb, are fairly simple, though:
- Class features that scale by level: Each time a class feature improves in a significant way (such as rogue sneak attack, or barbarian rage), treat it as a new feat gain. Some, like barbarian's rages per day going up are easy (Extra rage is a feat, and gives +2 rage/day, so +1 rage/day is .5 feats). Others, like bards getting new bardsong abilities, can be harder to calculate independently.
- Class features that give bonus feats: Easy, they're worth 1 feat. Even if they suck.
- Class features that give templates: Calculate the feat value of the template.
- Class features that have no feat equivalent: Try to compare it to a spell - Calculating the FEV of spells and spell slots is discussed below. Treat it as an N/day or at-will (depending) spell of appropriate level.
- Class features that advance other class features: For prestige classes that say 'add levels in class X to class Y for class feature Z', assume that the prestige class entry was at the lowest possible level (by RAI, discounting rule-bending entries), and add feats as appropriate for level gain in the original class for that feature.

Spellcasting:
Spellcasting is such a mess of potentials and wildly varying power levels and mechanics that I'm just going to try to apply a rule of thumb based on a few of the feats available. Specifically, Precocious Apprentice (1 specific 2nd level spell before you can cast 2nd level spells, after a 2nd level spell slot), Vatic Gaze (1 specific cantrip at-will), Communicator (2 specific 1st level spells & 1 cantrip 1/day).
From this, I estimate that:
-Infinite cantrips are worth 1 feat. Therefore, any number fewer cantrips can be worth no more than 1 feat.
-Two 1st level spell slots, either prepared from a very limited number of spells or spontaneously cast are worth 1 feat.
-One 2nd level spell slot is worth 1 feat
-Since there are no feats that offer higher level spells or spell slots, they are definitely worth more than 1 feat, even strictly limited.
This offers a formula:
Having Cantrips is worth 1 feat. Gaining additional cantrips is not worth any.
Each prepared spell slot (with unlimited options, eg. Cleric, Druid, etc.) is worth Spell Level * .5 feats. Wizard spell slots, because the spells are individually more potent, are worth spell level * 0.7.
Each spontaneous spell slot (with limited options, eg. Bard, Beguiler, etc.) is worth Spell Level * .3 feats (that is, 3/5 of a wizard spell slot). Sorceror spell slots, since they come from the more potent wizard list, are worth level * 0.5
Since it can be considdered very likely that any PC with a casting stat will have as high a bonus as possible in that stat, we can assume that the first tiem they gain spell slots for any level of spell, they will have at least one bonus spell slot for that level (even if they gain '0' spells at that level, eg. Bard). Thus, the first spell slot of any given level that a character gains is worth double.
Gaining additional 'known spells', without gaining additional spell slots, is equivalent to gaining more of the versatility of a prepared caster (as odd as that sounds to the spontaneous caster). Each 'known spell' added is worth 0.05 * spell level. Yes, it is that little, since really what you are gaining some of the value of your spell slots back.
For Psionics, you can considder each power point to be equivalent to a first level spontaneous spell slot (since 1 pp can be used for 1 level 1 power), with power known gained at each level equivalent to known spells gained at the maximum allowable level.
If a spell is granted as an at-will ability, call it feats equal to twice the spell's level. If it is granted as a situation dependent at-will ability, or an encounter based ability, count it as feats equal to spell level.
If a prestige class grants "+1 to an existing spellcasting progression", assume that the spellcasting progression is either Wizard (for arcane progression, or any progression) or Cleric (for divine) unless otherwise stated, and assume that the level the prestige class is entered is the earliest possible level (by RAI, discounting 'cheese entries') - so for example the first level of Mystic Theurge, you would assume that you are gaining the equivalent of Wizard 4 and Cleric 4 spellcasting.


Maneuvers, Binding, and Other neat mechanics:

A first level maneuver looks a lot like a first level spell. A second level maneuver still looks a lot like a first level spell. A seventh or eighth level maneuver has a tendency to look like a fourth level spell. The capstone (9th level) maneuvers are 5th or 6th level spell equivalents. Both normal readied maneuvers tend to look a lot like spells, granted on a per-encounter basis of levels equal to 1/2 their maneuver level (rounded up) - so an FEV equal to the equivalent spell level. Stances can be treated fully as at-will spells (x2) of level equal to 1/2 maneuver level - so an FEV equal to their maneuver level. Known maneuvers can be treated as known spells for spontaneous spellcasters (known stances are always 'readied' and therefore count towards encounter spells).

Binders are very different. Considder each binding to be a potential template that they can add. If we look at the average bonus you get from
-a 1st level binding Amon: Darkvision 60ft (1 feat), Ram attack (1 feat), Scaling Breath weapon 1/5 rounds (count as 2nd level spell (Burning hands, but with no level caps), at-will (Spell Level X2 in feats), with a limitation (feat value/2), so 2 feats - total 4 feats
-a 3rd level binding Andromalius: Jester's Mirth (Hideous Laughter (1st level spell for bards, 2nd for wizards) pseudo-at-will - 1.5 feats), locate item & see the unseen at-will (2 more 2nd level spells, at-will - 8 feats), rouge sneak attack +2d6 (scaling, average over 20 levels +3d6 - 3 feats) - total 12.5 feats
-a 5th level binding Acerak: (Detect undead at will (2 feats), Hide from Undead at will (2 feats), Speak with Undead at will (Speak with X is usually 3rd level - 6 feats), Lich's Immunity to electricity & cold (4th level spell, at-will - 8 feats), and Healing from negative energy (Equivalent to Necropolitan - 1 feat). Also Paralyzing Touch pseudo-at-will (2nd level spell at-will - 4 feats) - 23 feats
-a 8th level binding Halphax: (Halphax's Knowldge (+16 bonus to 2 skills, ~6 feats if you count 2 epic feats as counting (skill focus x4 + epic skill focus x2)), Imprison (while it emulates a 9th level spell, the reason it is a 9th level spell (permanent effect) is absent. I'd call this a 7th level spell 1/encounter - 7 feats). Iron Wall - Wall of Iron at-will, but the wall goes away after 10 rounds. Pseudo-at-will. - 7 feats. Secure Shelter - level 4 spell at-will. - 8 feats) 28 feats.
From my math, it seems that binding a single vestige is worth roughly (very roughly) 4 feats/vestige level.

For reasoning out other mechanics, look to spells and feats that grant similar powers. Encounter abilities are worth 2x daily abilities, and at-will abilities are worth about 5x (with limits and conditions lowering useage and therefore multiplier). Remember, feats are always-on abilities, while spells tend to be one-offs. If you come accros an at-will or always-on power, try to treat it more as a feat before assuming it is an expensive spell-equivalent ability.


FEV calculation may be a bit subjective, but using the guidelines provided, most FEV calculations should come out to roughly (within 10%) the same value for the same class/build.

What can FEV be used for? Well, it can be used for evaluating or designing character builds, for evaluating homebrew classes, or even for evaluating published material. What I originally intended it for was to create a set of homebrewed base classes that were all equivalent to tier 3 - so the FEV of the various classes also correlates strongly to the Tier those classes are in.

kestrel404
2010-07-09, 11:32 AM
Example FEV calculations for the PHB classes:

Barbarian:
HD Size: .2/level
Class Skills: 0
Number of Skill points: +.5/Level
BAB: +1.5/every odd level
Good Saves: One good save, +1 feat at first level, and +.5 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels.
Weapon Proficiency: +4 for Simple and all Martial.
Armor Proficiency: +2 for light & medium, +1 for shields
Rage: +1 at first level (first rage, roughly equivalent to 2nd level spell 1/day), +.5 at every 4th level
Illiteracy: -1 feat, this is essentially a flaw
Fast Movement: +2 feats (+5 move is a feat)
Uncanny Dodge: +1.5 (slightly better than a standard feat), +1 for Improved uncanny dodge at 5th level
Trap sense: +.5 at 3rd level, +.5 each 3 levels after
Damage Reduction: +1 feat at 7th and +.5 each 3 after (+2 DR/- is available from several feats once you have DR/-)
Greater Rage: +1 feat at 11th
Indomitable Will: +1 feat at 14th
Tireless Rage: +.5 feat at 17th level
Mighty Rage: +1 feat at 20th
Feat value at first level: 12.2
Total feats by 20th level: 55.5

Bard:
HD Size: .05/level
Class Skills: +1
Number of Skill points: +1/Level
BAB: +1.5 at 3rd level and every 4th level after
Good Saves: Two good saves, +2 feats at first level, and +1 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels.
Weapon Proficiency: +2 for Simple and some Martial.
Armor Proficiency: +1 for light, +1 for shields
Bardic Knowledge: +.25/level (as a free 'skill point' each level)
Bardic Music: Treat as Spontaneous casting spell slots. Known spells all 1st-level equivalent, so +.3 feats/lvl. At bard level 6, these spell slots can now cast a 2nd level spell (suggestion), so are now worth .6/lvl (retroactively). They go up to .9 at 12th level, 1.2 at 15th level and 1.5 at 18th level. Each new bard song acts as a new 'spell known' with a level equivalent to the spell it emulates (treat 'inspire greatness' as heroism and 'inspire heroics' as greater heroism).
Spellcasting: A bard is a spontaneous caster. +1 feat for cantrips at first level, additional spellcasting by spell slot/spells known as per the formula. Total casting ability is 4(5) spontaneous slots from levels 1-6, with 5 spells known at each level from 1-5, and 4 at level 6. Total worth: 56.2
Feat value at first level: 9.6
Total feats by 20th level: 130.7

Cleric:
HD Size: .1/level
Class Skills: 0 (could be +1 due to domain, but that is calculated into domains)
Number of Skill points: 0
BAB: +1.5 at 3rd level and every 4th level after
Good Saves: Two good saves, +2 feats at first level, and +1 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels.
Weapon Proficiency: +1 for all Simple.
Armor Proficiency: +2 for light and medium, +1 for shields
Turn Undead: 2 Feats (1 for ability, 1 for quantity, since this is one of the few class features that start at more than 1/day)
Domains: 4 feats (2/domain, since each domain grants abilities superior to a single feat)
Spellcasting: +1 for cantrips, +1 for 1(2) 1st level spells, +.3 for 1st level domain spell, +.05 for 1st level spontaneous healing. Total spellcasting: 5(6) spells level 1-5, 4(5) spells level 6-9, 1 spell of each level 1-9 as domain spell, 1 spontaneous known spell/level 1-9. Total: 135.75
Feat value at first level: 14.45
Total feats by 20th level: 161.25

Druid:
HD Size: .1/level
Class Skills: +1
Number of Skill points: +.5/Level
BAB: +1.5 at 3rd level and every 4th level after
Good Saves: Two good saves, +2 feats at first level, and +1 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels.
Weapon Proficiency: +1.5 for some Simple and some martial
Armor Proficiency: +1.5 for some light and medium, +1 for shields
Bonus Language: +.5, as two bonus skill points for a free language
Animal companion: +.05/Level, Equivalent to leadership, but only gained for Druid advancement
Nature sense: +1, same bonus as a skills feat
Wild Empathy: +1, as a feat that says 'May use diplomacy on X', where X is animals
Woodland Stride: +1, equivalent to a feat
Trackless step: +1, Tracking is a feat, so anti-tracking should also be a feat
Resist Nature's Lure: +1, +4 to any save under specific (uncommon) conditions
Wild Shape: Similar to an Alter Self N/day, Treated as a spontaneous caster's 2nd level spell slot. Improves to a 3rd level spell at 8th level, and 4th level at 15th. A seperate group of spell slots open up at 16th level with the ability to turn into elementals, equivalent to a 5th level spell slot. This improves to 6th level spell slots at 20th level. Total value: +11.4
Venom Immunity: +3, Equivalent to a three-feat chain granting strong resistence, and ending with immunity to, poison.
A Thousand Faces: +4, Alter self (2nd level spell), at-will.
Timeless Body: +2, definitely more powerful than a feat
Spellcasting: +1 for cantrips, +1 for 1(2) 1st level spells at 1st level, +.05 for spontaneous spells known at 1st level. At 20th level, 5(6) spell slots level 1-5 and 4(5) spell slots 6-9, with 1 spontaneous spell known at each level 1-9. Total: 122.25
Feat value at first level: 12.2
Total feats by 20th level: 177.65

Fighter:
HD Size: .15/level
Class Skills: 0
Number of Skill points: 0
BAB: +1.5 at every odd level
Good Saves: One good save, +1 feats at first level, and +.5 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels.
Weapon Proficiency: +4 for all Simple and martial
Armor Proficiency: +3 for light, medium and heavy, +2 for shields plus tower shield
Bonus Feat: +1 at first level, +1 at ever even level
Feat value at first level: 12.65
Total feats by 20th level: 51

Monk:
HD Size: .1/level
Class Skills: +1
Number of Skill points: +.5/Level
BAB: +1.5 at 3rd level and every 4th level after
Good Saves: Three good save, +3 feats at first level, and +1.5 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels.
Weapon Proficiency: +1.5 for some Simple and martial
Armor Proficiency: +0
AC Bonus: +1, While normally stronger than a feat, the requirement that no armor be worn is such a determintal requirement that this ability is LESS powerful than the 'vow of poverty' feat.
Flurry of Blows: +2, While more powerful than a single feat, the limitation on weapons here prevents Flurry of Blows from being more powerful than a two-feat combo chain
Unarmed Strike: +1 for Improved Unarmed Strike, +1 for each 4 levels of monk (As Improved Natural Weapon feat)
Bonus Feat: +1 at first level, +1 2nd and 6th level
Evasion: +1.5, evasion is slightly more powerful than a standard feat
Fast Movement: +2 at 3rd level (+5 speed is a standard feat), but only +.5 at each additional 3 levels since the improvement to speed (single stat) is linear
Still Mind: +1, a +2 bonus on all saves against a common effect
Ki Strike: +1, with another +1 at 10th and 16th levels
Slow Fall: +1, with +.25 each even monk level after 4th
Purity of Body: +1, since it does not prevent supernatural or magical diseases
Wholeness of Body: +1, Access to cantrips (heal 1 damage) equal to twice monk level
Improved Evasion: +1.5, Improved Evasion is still slightly better than a normal feat
Diamond Body: +3, as Druid
Abundant Step: +1.2, as a spontaneous spell slot for a single 4th level spell
Diamond Soul: +5, as an at-will but limited Spell Resistence (5th level spell), since this ability prevents both attacks AND friendly spells
Quivering Palm: +1.05, The closest match to this is either Finger of Death or Destruction, both 7th level spells. So, conditional (1/week) spontaneous spell slot for a 7th level spell
Timeless Body: +2, as Druid
Tongue of the Sun and Moon: +10, as Speak with Animals (1st level spell), Speak with Plants (2nd level spell) and Tongues (2nd level spell), at-will
Empty Body: +9, As an Etherealness spell, at-will, with a 1-round duration limitation
Perfect Self: As a template, worth +5 feats (for DR 10/Magic)
Feat value at first level: 13.1
Total feats by 20th level: 94.75

Paladin:
HD Size: .15/level
Class Skills: 0
Number of Skill points: 0
BAB: +1.5 at every odd level
Good Saves: One good save, +1 feats at first level, and +.5 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels.
Weapon Proficiency: +4 for all Simple and martial
Armor Proficiency: +3 for light, medium and heavy, +2 for shields plus tower shield
Detect Evil: +1, as 1st level spell at-will
Smite Evil: +1, with +.5 at 5th level and every 5 levels after
Divine Grace: +4.5, as a bonus of charisma to a single saving thrown would be slightly better than a feat
Lay on Hands: +2, no more useful than unlimited Cure Minor Wound spells, so +2 is the upper bounds here
Aura of Courage: +4, With +3 for immunity to fear and +1 more for the 10 foot aura.
Divine Health: +3, as Druid immunity to poison
Turn Undead: +2, as Cleric
Summon Mount: As a spontaneous slot for Extended Summon Monster II (3rd level spell), improving to Summon Monster III at 8th level and Summon Monster IV at 15th. Maximum Value: 1.5 feats
Remove Disease: .9 feats, As a spell slot for a 3rd level spell. Since it can be used nearly once a day by 18th level, treating it as a standard constrained spell slot (burst capacity notwithstanding).
Code of Conduct: -1, as a flaw at first level
Spellcasting: nothing at 1st level, by 20th 3(4) spell slots 1-4 - Total 20
Feat value at first level: 12.65
Total feats by 20th level: 70.4

Ranger:
HD Size: .1/level
Class Skills: +1
Number of Skill points: +1/Level
BAB: +1.5 at every odd level
Good Saves: Two good save, +2 feats at first level, and +1 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels.
Weapon Proficiency: +4 for all Simple and martial
Armor Proficiency: +1 for light, +1 for shields
Favored Enemy: +1 at 1st level, addition +.5 at 5th and each 5 after
Track: +1
Wild Empathy: +1
Combat Style: +1 at 2, 6 and 11
Endurance: +1
Animal Companion: +1, as leadership
Woodland Stride: +1
Swift Tracker: +1
Evasion: +1.5
Camouflage: +1
Hide in Plain Sight: +1.5
Spellcasting: None at 1st level, by 20th level 3(4) spell slots 1-4 - total +20
Feat value at first level: 14.6
Total feats by 20th level: 86

Rogue:
HD Size: .05/level
Class Skills: +1
Number of Skill points: +1.5/Level
BAB: +1.5 at 3rd level and every 4th level after
Good Saves: One good save, +1 feats at first level, and +.5 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels.
Weapon Proficiency: +2 for all Simple and some martial
Armor Proficiency: +1 for light
Sneak attack: +1 for bonus 1d6 conditional damage/attack, with +1 at each odd level
Trapfinding: +1
Evasion +1.5
Trap Sense: +.5 at 3rd level, additional +.5 each 3 levels after
Uncanny Dodge: +1.5
Improved Uncanny Dodge: +1
Special Abilities: Each is slightly better than a feat. +1.5 at 10th and additional +1.5 each 3 levels after
Feat value at first level: 8.55
Total feats by 20th level: 71

Sorceror:
HD Size: +0
Class Skills: +0
Number of Skill points: +0
BAB: +0
Good Saves: One good save, +1 feats at first level, and +.5 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels.
Weapon Proficiency: +1 for all Simple
Armor Proficiency: +0
Summon Familiar: +1, at most
Spellcasting: +1 for cantrips, 3(4) 1st level spell slots and 2 known spells at 1st level - 1.6 feats. By 20th level, 6(7) spell slots 1-9 and 5 spells known 1-2, 4 spells known 3-5, 3 spells known 6-9 - Total 134.65
Feat value at first level: 5.6
Total feats by 20th level: 138.65

Wizard (Assumed specialist):
HD Size: +0
Class Skills: +1 (there are a lot of knowledge skills)
Number of Skill points: +0
BAB: +0
Good Saves: One good save, +1 feats at first level, and +.5 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels.
Weapon Proficiency: +1 for all Simple
Armor Proficiency: +0
Summon Familiar: +1, at most
Scribe Scroll: +1
Bonus feats: +1 at 5th level and every 5 levels after
Spellcasting: +1 for cantrips, 2(3) 1st level spell slots (specialist slots will be considdered full spell slots here, since if you're specializing it means you WANT to use spells from that school) - 1.5 feats. By 20th level, 5(6) spell slots 1-9 - Total 163
Feat value at first level: 8.5
Total feats by 20th level: 173


Other forum favorites calculated in FEV:

Total values over 20 levels:
Crusader - 115.8 (Maneuvers readied counted as 1.5, since re-readying maneuvers is automantic for this class, therefore closer to at-will)
Swordsage - 131.5
Warblade - 126.45 (Maneuvers readied counted as 1.5, since re-readying maneuvers is easy and selective)
Binder - 130.5
Warlock - 127.5 (Invocations counted as at-will spells of: Least=1, Lesser=3, Greater=4, Dark=5, Eldritch blast counted as 2/d6 since it is unconditional damage aside from hit-roll)
Warmage - 129.8
Factotum - 120 (The factotum is a difficult class to categorize because its abilities are mostly per-encounter and highly synergystic. This is mostly a best guess.)
Psion - 166.7 (Valuing Psion PP as equal to Sorceror 1st level spell slots)
CW Samurai - 43.5 (I'm being fairly generous for the fear-based effects here)


Converting FEV to Tiers:

Tier 1: 160+
Tier 2: 135-159
Tier 3: 100-134
Tier 4: 70-99
Tier 5: 50-69
Tier 6: < 50

This is a best guess. If you want consistency, you can go with a Tier every 50 feats, but then you'd have to up the value of spell slots by a bit, and re-work the math for other class features (like maneuvers and bound vestiges). I think this works just fine, though.


Edit: I added in Tier 5. I don't know why my original system didn't have tier 5 in it, but I've fixed that.
edit: Added up Monk wrong. New total value over 20 levels.

kestrel404
2010-07-09, 11:34 AM
If you've got questions, comments, or suggestions for making my math better, please post them. I'm still trying to get the bugs out and help would be appreciated.

subject42
2010-07-09, 11:51 AM
How is the monk such an outlier when comparing your system to conventional wisdom?

The Rabbler
2010-07-09, 11:57 AM
I have a question (and I don't mean to be rude or insulting): why bother?

as we have established, feats vary widely on the power scale, so it doesn't seem like there would be much point in comparing class features via feats. the monk is a perfect example; a monk has a FEV of over 100, but the feats that it compares to are (for the most part) terrible. All this really does is show how many features a class gets over the course of 20 levels without accurate value to those class features.

kestrel404
2010-07-09, 12:04 PM
The monk has some pretty powerful abilities, and it's got class features at every level. However, this system doesn't take MAD or synergy into account at all - it assumes that the class is well-built for its role and that all powers contribute in some way. The Monk might have a lot of nice abilities, but they just don't mesh. For example, one of their highest feat-equivalent powers is Tongue of the Sun and Moon, at equivalent to 10 feats, which doesn't have anything at all to do with the rest of the class. That would be something I could see a Druid, or even a Ranger, using all the time. But why does a Monk get it (other than vague pseudo mythology-related reasons)?

I had a reverse of this problem with the Factotum. My original FEV score for that class was 99. I was estimating most of the individual abilities of the factotum as per-encounter, because of the inspiration point limit. But the Factotum uses only one primary stat (Int), gets bonuses to virtually everything based on that stat, and can use virtually all of its abilities at-will at higher levels, since encounters don't tend to last long enough to go through 15+ (after a couple feats) inspiration points. Plus, even at a 15 FEV, I think I'm under-valuing the capstone ability.

@Rabbler: Because I couldn't find anything better. I wanted a way to balance homebrew classes that didn't involve significant amounts of playtesting. This seemed like a good way to start.

The Rabbler
2010-07-09, 12:36 PM
@Rabbler: Because I couldn't find anything better. I wanted a way to balance homebrew classes that didn't involve significant amounts of playtesting. This seemed like a good way to start.

aaahh, that makes sense. I like the idea, but this seems like the wrong place to start. I think you'd be best off trying to rank feats and then applying FEVs to classes. the same could be said of spells, though it would be much more difficult. also, instead of giving assigning spell lists different FEVs, you might want to give a flat bonus for simply having spells and then give +X FEV for possessing specific spells (to help with homebrew values). besides that, I feel like this is a fairly good way to measure the quantity of bonuses that a class gets. now if only there was a method to measuring quality quantitatively.

kestrel404
2010-07-09, 01:33 PM
@Rabbler: This is only a means for estimation. A good player can do a lot with optimization that you couldn't figure out with a system like this. If I started assigning different values to individual feats, the calculations would become ridiculous. I just go with the assumption that every feat/spell/whatever choice is optimal and go from there. Is a 5th level spell, once per day, really worth more than two feats? It is if that spell is Baleful Polymorph or Plane Shift. Probably not if it's Mass Cure Light Wounds or Cone of Cold.

So I just assume that the feats are good feats, and the spells are good spells, and if I'm wrong then I'm erring on the side of an underpowered rather than easily broken class, which is easier for a good GM to deal with.

The Rabbler
2010-07-09, 03:52 PM
fair enough. It seems you've put a great deal of thought into this, and it shows.

Umael
2010-07-09, 04:49 PM
I got to give you credit for ploting that out. While it is obvious there are flaws with the premise (for example, why does monk, a class that is viewed by so many as sucking, have such a high value), it gives a valuable insight not only as to how powerful the various classes are, but how much needs to be done to fix them without having to go into complex calculations.

As a sidenote, I've been playing with a feat-based classless system in which I distilled all class features into feats and measured from there. All PCs started with 15 feats and gain three feats per level. On looking at your system, I think I might want to give options for more feats per level, or even give a "tier" system for how world-shattering the PCs want to become.

kestrel404
2010-07-10, 11:20 AM
Oh? I'm curious, how much value did you put on spells? Or are you playing in a magicless world?

aivanther
2010-07-10, 11:34 AM
Interesting idea, but it doesn't seem to pan out as practical. As you noted, not all feats are equivalent, but giving an equal value to rage and nature sense seems...off. One really gives a class one of its powerful edges, the other is a sort of 'huh...anyways...'

Can you measure it this way? Sure, you showed you can.
Is it useful? Does not seem so as it appears to over value, under value, and completely miss some important pieces (synergy and MAD)

Theodoxus
2010-07-29, 11:13 AM
That's just a case of refining the data. Once you have the general premise of what each ability is worth in comparison to others, you simply need to take the next step and design a tier system for feats themselves.

Another thing, when looking at the comparison - as noted, the Tongue of Sun and Moon is quite... powerful, in terms of unlocking such a thing through feats. But in terms of actual in game usefulness, it's more limited. Most monks aren't the party face. Being able to communicate with the ancient dragon, interdimensional demonslayer and the trees and bushes during the Summit of Conglomeration is nice and all, but hardly practical or common.

Because of the combat nature of the game, Evasion will rank higher than Slowfall , which ranks higher than +2 bonus to craft checks.

Fouredged Sword
2010-07-29, 11:56 AM
I think this system works great for homebrew comparison. You just need to find a class that functions close to the class you want to create and use this sytem to guestimate a new tier for your homebrew class.

With a guageing point to compare to (the non-homebrew class) you can use this system to scale the power of the class up or down.

It would also be interesting to see a progression of the PhB classes broken down level by level. It would grant some insight into the powerlevel of the classes at the various levels of gameplay.

Marnath
2010-07-29, 02:50 PM
I think this system works great for homebrew comparison. You just need to find a class that functions close to the class you want to create and use this sytem to guestimate a new tier for your homebrew class.

With a guageing point to compare to (the non-homebrew class) you can use this system to scale the power of the class up or down.

It would also be interesting to see a progression of the PhB classes broken down level by level. It would grant some insight into the powerlevel of the classes at the various levels of gameplay.
Speaking of which, shouldn't this thread be in Homebrew?

Morph Bark
2010-07-29, 04:12 PM
How do you figure Incarnum would feature in here?

I'm trying to do some... uh, FEV-ing on my Dabblemaster (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8919949) class, and since it uses almost everything out there... yeah, it gets tough to do. The Feature slots will have a highly variable Feat-Equivalency, too, considering you could get a variety of things with it.


And yes, I think this should be in Homebrew too. It might help evaluating and grading PrCs and classes some, even though playtesting them in PbP might work better.

EDIT: Bah, I don't get some of the FEV-ing exactly, and with the Dabblemaster it's extra hard... I give up.

jiriku
2010-07-29, 04:57 PM
This does show considerable effort. My initial reaction was kind of dismissive, but after reading through your evaluations, I'm impressed. I would add +1 to what other posters are saying though, which is that you can drive a truck through the loopholes created by ignoring the relative power of the feats you're using for comparison. There's also considerable variation in the cost-effectiveness of gaining certain abilities, and your choice of yardstick heavily impacts the cost you assign to an ability.

For example, you gave the barbarian and monk +2 feats for +10 ft. move speed, because +5 move is a feat. However, the longstrider spell grants a long-duration +10 move, and is valued at 0.5 feats. Longstrider values +5 move at 0.25 feats (or 0.5 if you argue it has to be case twice per day to cover the typical adventuring day). Persistent swift haste is an 8th level spell, worth 5 feats to an archivist (4 for the spell slot, 1 for the Persistent Spell feat), and it values +5 move at about 0.5 feats, if you accept that the increased move speed is about 40% of the value of the spell.

Even a simple 2-tier feat-ranking system would greatly increase the accuracy of your measurements.

Thrice Dead Cat
2010-07-29, 05:18 PM
I love the premise, but I have to agree with jiriku that all of the math isn't entirely finished yet, even though a lot of what you have done is pretty frakking amazing.

My gut reaction for purposes of homebrew is to shoot for the 100-130 range, as that is probably fairly close to Tier 3, but that's just me.

Siosilvar
2010-07-29, 05:55 PM
Out of curiosity, I calculated the FEV using this system for my improved duelist PrC (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=154993); doubling the value for being only a 10-level class, I got 123.5. Which is tier 3 and about where in the tier I'd put it.

Strictly speaking, this means that my sense of balance is equivalent to my sense of balance... but one has a number attached via reasoning.

Tyndmyr
2010-07-29, 07:10 PM
I got as far as realizing you rated monk nearly twice as good as barbarian. That's pretty much the point at which it's clear the system isn't measuring anything actually useful.

Beorn080
2010-07-29, 07:46 PM
I got as far as realizing you rated monk nearly twice as good as barbarian. That's pretty much the point at which it's clear the system isn't measuring anything actually useful.

I saw that too, but as has been said, the reason for it is the vast swath of abilities that are nearly useless.

If someone made a class that got +20 to Craft(Useless Items) every level, that would give it a value of 200 by itself, yet it clearly does nothing for the character. That's what happened to the monk.

Fouredged Sword
2010-07-29, 08:00 PM
Any mathmatical system to evaluate a complicated system you will have outliers. This does not remove the usefullness ot decrease the relivence of the math. This is a very useful way to look at classes. Could it use some tinkering to make it track better to reality, but Dnd is very complicated when you let smart people play with the rules and bend them.

Tyndmyr
2010-07-29, 08:15 PM
Any mathmatical system to evaluate a complicated system you will have outliers. This does not remove the usefullness ot decrease the relivence of the math.

Er, yes it does. If a rating system rates things incorrectly, it is a lot less useful and relevant.


This is a very useful way to look at classes. Could it use some tinkering to make it track better to reality, but Dnd is very complicated when you let smart people play with the rules and bend them.

Very useful? Why is it useful? Consider it as opposed to say, the current tier system. What makes this an improvement?

Im not talking about arcane tinkering...Im talking about comparing two base classes head to head. Barbarian vs monk. There's absolutely no way the monk is twice as good, or even close. No "smart people bending the rules" is responsible for that. All the melee class rankings are pretty messed up. Barb is rated rather poorly, down by fighter, with classes like paladin ranked higher.

Rixx
2010-07-29, 11:00 PM
It is interesting, but it doesn't take synergy into account. It's more or less like saying a person with three hundred bullets is equivalent to a person with three bullets and one handgun.

Milskidasith
2010-07-29, 11:10 PM
These systems are never accurate; for instance, Monks are significantly more powerful than barbarians and fighters, which is pretty inaccurate. Barbarians and fighters (especially dungeoncrashers) are much higher on T5 than you have them listed (though you don't have T5 listed at all, honestly).

Basically, this type of thing just doesn't work. It's complex and won't actually solve any problems or help things be balanced because of how subjective things are; while you can easily tweak the numbers so the features add up to the right numbers, you can never make it so that, if you were to create a brand new class, it would be balanced just by using the numbers. It's like the travelling salesman problem; you can know you've got the shortest distance possible (or what tier something is), but you can't make a formula to get the answer (or balance stuff without work).

jseah
2010-07-30, 12:10 AM
^OP:
Perhaps you could alter the system.

Make it have a multiplier for things that do/not do "what the class is supposed to do".

Eg. DPS Monk would get a score for 1x multiplier for the feats needed for flurry of blows but say 1/10th of the calculated number for the feats needed for tongue of the sun and moon.
While a UMD + skills rogue would get a 1x multiplier for feats for good skills and say 1/2 for SA.

Theodoxus
2010-07-30, 12:45 AM
These systems are never accurate; for instance, Monks are significantly more powerful than barbarians and fighters, which is pretty inaccurate. Barbarians and fighters (especially dungeoncrashers) are much higher on T5 than you have them listed (though you don't have T5 listed at all, honestly).

Basically, this type of thing just doesn't work. It's complex and won't actually solve any problems or help things be balanced because of how subjective things are; while you can easily tweak the numbers so the features add up to the right numbers, you can never make it so that, if you were to create a brand new class, it would be balanced just by using the numbers. It's like the travelling salesman problem; you can know you've got the shortest distance possible (or what tier something is), but you can't make a formula to get the answer (or balance stuff without work).

But in some aspects, monks are significantly more powerful than barbarians and fighters. Just because they're not synergistic, or particularly useful in most games, doesn't make them weak - in comparison.

What this does, and I'm not sure of the full value of it, but it gives credence to people who look at classes holistically and say "wow, Monk rocks!" before actually realizing that all that movement doesn't work with FoB, or that their slow fall is craptacular in comparison to feather fall. Basically FEV brings out the lens of the un-optimizer; it allows others to see classes how WotC apparently perceives them - and it makes level headed comparisons.

It's biggest value though, is in measuring new classes against old - you can take pretty basic information and come to conclusions, just based on the FEV, of whether a homebrew class needs a bit more oomph or not. Once you have the numbers in the ballpark you're shooting for, it then easier to look at the class and determine, based on synergy, what tier it belongs in.

BooNL
2010-07-30, 12:54 AM
Oh dear lord, the numbers! My head hurts just looking at that!

Seriously though, nice work. I haven't read through all of it, but I like the system you developed. Even though everything is still fully subjective, as scores (no matter how justified) are still applied arbitrarily.

Also, let's refrain from turning this into yet another Monk discussion, shall wel?

Tyndmyr
2010-07-30, 01:49 AM
Just because they're not... particularly useful in most games, doesn't make them weak - in comparison.

Your logic intrigues me, and I wish to know how you can arrive at this statement.

How is something that is not worth using powerful?

Beorn080
2010-07-30, 02:18 AM
Your logic intrigues me, and I wish to know how you can arrive at this statement.

How is something that is not worth using powerful?

If you referring to the Tongues part of the Monk, it is fairly powerful, just on a horrible chassis. Its like putting a jet engine on a rock. Sure, the rock has a jet engine on it, but you can't actually do that much with it.

I mean, add it onto the Bard. Thanks to the synergy between Cha casting, diplomancy, and an enhancement based spellblock, he could turn a daffodil into a fanatic follower.

The system is a good base, but it does fail to take synergies and MAD/SAD into account.

icefractal
2010-07-30, 03:24 AM
While this fits some of the classes, I think where it falls apart is that the value of abilities can only be accurately evaluated from a view of the entire build necessary to achieve them.

For instance, basic question - how many CL does the Mystic Theurge lose? Piecewise, it looks like zero. But in actuality, the answer is three, barring early-entry shenanigans.

A more involved example (not mine): let's say you have a class based around dagger use. One of the abilities grants you +10 to Disarm while using a dagger. How much of an advantage does that give you? The answer is zero - it simply puts you at the same level as any other character who plans to use Disarm, because those characters are using two-handed weapons with +2 to Disarm, for a total of +10 higher than a basic dagger user.

This is probably why the FEV system overvalues the Monk. Many of the Monk's abilities are "running in place" bonuses like the one above - they simply put the Monk at the same level even a Warrior is at just by wearing armor and using weapons. Non-synergy is another important point - having the abilities to breathe fire, swordfight, and grapple people is not as potent as having the abilities to fly, boost your strength, and charge really well with a spear. Hence why many point-based systems have something like Multipower/Arrays.

jseah
2010-07-30, 03:50 AM
Doesn't this mean that the FEV system should then include the prerequisites into the calculation?

A prerequisite that makes the ability moot would reduce FEV significantly (unlimited magic missiles as an SLA at level 17 is nearly useless)
A prerequisite that hampers the use of the ability would be calculated lower

A prerequisite that can be easily fulfilled or are synergistic abilities would lower FEV score much less to not at all (that frostburn cold summoning feat requiring Augment Summoning)

kestrel404
2010-07-30, 07:19 AM
Wow! Thanks to everyone for their insights.

Several of you have said that I need to:
A) Refine my measuring stick - preferably by ranking feats (A feat is not always worth a feat, some feats are better than others, etc.)
B) Find a way to measure/account for synergy

So that's what I'll work on. I really didn't want to try to come up with values for individual feats, but it makes a lot of sense. Some feats really are strictly better than others. I'll see what can be done about making a more uniform measuring stick.

As for synergy, that's really tough. Coming up with a ruleset that can measure synergy accurately is a problem on the order of coming up with a decent AI (in fact, it's on the list of problems whose solution could used to CREATE a decent AI). But I'll do what I can to ballpark this - probably build it into the way that I value individual feats/spells.

So, I'll do what I can to refine the system. In the meantime, comments, suggestions and ideas are always helpful. Thanks!

Prime32
2010-07-30, 07:28 AM
It is interesting, but it doesn't take synergy into account. It's more or less like saying a person with three hundred bullets is equivalent to a person with three bullets and one handgun.I love this.

aivanther
2010-07-30, 07:58 AM
Any mathmatical system to evaluate a complicated system you will have outliers. This does not remove the usefullness ot decrease the relivence of the math.

Uh, an outlier can completely destroy a data set, if it's extreme enough or from a small enough sample. And anything that says "ignore the outlier" needs to have an extremely good reason for why it deserves to be ignored.

Also, it hasn't demonstrated to be useful at all yet, much less in comparison to any other system, such as the current one. You've made an assertion of relevance without any data to back it up. I could classify classes by length of name as my tier system, but that doesn't demonstrate that the system is relevant to what I'm purporting to measure: strength of the classes.

You know, there was once a system of personality measurement that looked like it could really do wonders. It made some logical sense, its ideas were testable and measurable, and it was exclusively a mathematically based system. Turns out phrenology, does not actually work.

As I said before, I'm not knocking the system the OP is trying to design, I am point out that it has some flaws and therefore needs some editting. Simply defending it and pretending the errors don't matter is quite a foolish thing to do.

kestrel404
2010-07-30, 08:02 AM
@M-Bark: FEV for the Dabblemaster
HD Size: 0
Class Skills: +1
Number of Skill points: +.5/Level
BAB: +1.5 at 3rd level and every 4 levels after (+7.5 by level 20)
Good Saves: One good save, +1 feat at first level, and +.5 at 4th, 8th, 16th and 20th levels.
Weapon Proficiency: +2 for Simple and some Martial.
Armor Proficiency: +1 for light armor, +1 for light shields
Eldritch blast (Sp): +1 for 1d6 damage
Fundamental of shadow (Su): So at 1st level you've got 3 of the same 1st level spell. That's worth +1. At 14th level, you can use it an unlimited number of times per day, so then it's worth +2.5.
Meldshaping: Well, you say it oddly, but what effectively happens is that each time you get the ability to shape soulmelds, you're effectively giving the 'Shape Soulmeld' feat, with the minor difference that you're not limited to shaping a specific soulmeld. This is not a huge advantage (since soulmelds effectively get better as you level, you can usually create a build that's good from 1 to 20 using the same soulmelds the whole way), so I'd say +1.5 for every soulmeld you get. +1.5 at 1st level, +12 by level 20
Invocations: Least invocation = level 1 at-will, so +2.5. Lesser is a level 3 at-will, so 7.5. Greater is a level 5 at will, so +12.5. Dark is a level 6 at-will, so +15. Total: +37.5
Eldritch Reinforcement: I'd call this caster-rage, although the self-stacking makes it a bit nicer. +3, with each additional use worth +.5. Total of +5.5
Soul Binding: 1 vestige at max of level 7 . Worth 28 feats at level 20.
Feature slots: Spellcasting by any other name. This has the worst aspects of both prepared and spontaneous casting built-in, but since you can steal from everybody, I'm going to go with valuing this as equal to sorceror casting. By level 20, you've got: 5 1st level spells and 4 2nd-6th level spells. 42.5 feats
Total at 1st level: 11
Total by level 20: 154.5

Congratulations, it's a tier 2 class.

@aivanther: I agree. Outliers are bad. But I'm trying to address that with changes to the system. If you've got some suggestions on how to do that, I'd appreciate any ideas.

Milskidasith
2010-07-30, 08:03 AM
Figuring out this system in a way that makes it balanced is an NP-complete problem; you can figure out if it gives you the right answer (which it currently doesn't; fighter is an outlier by being on the low end of t5 when they are on the low end of T4/high end of T5, for instance, and Monks are an outlier by being mid-low T4 instead of low T5), but there's no way to ever get an actual formula for balance. There is no way this will ever work out to be effectively balanced, especially once you start throwing subjective modifiers such as synergy into the mix, because that becomes purely opinion anyway so you might as well just evaluate it by hand anyway.

EDIT: Dabblemaster is not T2. Three outliers.

EDIT X2: Saw the other classes list, Psion is not T1 (simply not enough options), and all the martial classes are, while strongly T3, not nearly so close to the edge of T2. Then again, that's hard to judge, because T3 and T2 is one of the biggest power gaps; T2 is "I can win at anything" and T3 is "I can be really, really good at a lot of things and/or I can win at some things."

jseah
2010-07-30, 09:03 AM
In an old thread I made (but no one replied to), I tried to list and rank what abilities were good for.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=157259

Basically, if the FEV system were to be modified, I would recommend that abilities have their value multiplied like so:
Statistic improvements get 1x
Tactical abilities get 1.5x
Information management gets 2x
Strategic abilities gets 4x

Furthermore, abilities that cover a larger scope would also have a higher value and as a rule of thumb for synergy, every ability that covers the same ground that another ability of the class does (and stacks, not overlaps), an additional multiplier is added.

kestrel404
2010-07-30, 10:03 AM
Basically, if the FEV system were to be modified, I would recommend that abilities have their value multiplied like so:
Statistic improvements get 1x
Tactical abilities get 1.5x
Information management gets 2x
Strategic abilities gets 4x

Furthermore, abilities that cover a larger scope would also have a higher value and as a rule of thumb for synergy, every ability that covers the same ground that another ability of the class does (and stacks, not overlaps), an additional multiplier is added.

This! This is helpful. It explains why Plane Shift is so much more powerful than Harm. Plane Shift is a Strategic Spell (you can change the battlefield, by leaving it, or moving the opponent, or by changing the environment in a fundamental way), whereas Harm is Tactical (Save or die ability). I might play with your multipliers, but I'm definitely going to try to incorporate the idea.

Theodoxus
2010-07-30, 10:44 AM
Well, there's that...

But I was actually referring to the whole package.

What makes barbarian particularly powerful? Rage is useful, especially for smart players who use rage judiciously and minimize the down time fatigue til after the fight. Trap sense is ok, Uncanny dodge is very useful at the start of a fight and in certain circumstances. DR is nice... fast movement is meh. I mean really, if a problem with monks is fast movement / FoB synergy, then barbarian also has the same issue with fast movement and a full attack with his good BAB... (and I'm taking vanilla barbi, not lion pounce barbi with her pink camero).

Everything else the barbarian gets just boosts those abilities. All in all, decent for combat - increasing damage, hit, mitigation (at the cost of avoidance)... but since this is a combat oriented game, those are considered 'good' qualities.


Monks on the other hand get a plethora of other powerful abilities; very fast movement, increased AC, additional attacks in a round, resistances to all kinds of magical attacks (from base saves to Still Mind to Evasion and eventually SR), self heal, immunity to poison, ability to speak with anything... Teleportation, stunning blows, death attacks... In the right arena, all those are very powerful abilities, arguably better than +4 Str, +2 Con from rage.

Its just that they don't help the monk in the one thing that anyone cares about: maximizing your DPS in a combat oriented game. And that's the problem.

In a game where you either need to do lots of DPS to get noticed, or be able to control the battlefield (or your opponents) so that you aren't overwhelmed by enemy DPS, you end up with two kinds of characters: blasters and gods. If you aren't one or the other, no matter how cool you are "off camera", you're relegated to the status of healbot. That's the monk's problem. Not enough damage over time to be useful, and practically null battlefield control - even their vaunted position of 'mage stopper' falls short primarily due to BAB issues.

But! in games where DPS isn't as important; infiltration, cloak & dagger, social interaction, rescuing the damsel in distress, etc, their abilities will shine brighter than your optimized barbi that does 400+ points of damage a round.

That's what I mean.

Erom
2010-07-30, 10:44 AM
Suggestion - for taking Mad/Sad into account: abilities cost X * (.8 + .1*Y) where Y is the number of abilities keyed off that stat

Obviously you should play with the numbers, but I think one simple modification like that would get you close.

Ditto
2010-07-30, 11:00 AM
Im not talking about arcane tinkering...Im talking about comparing two base classes head to head. Barbarian vs monk. There's absolutely no way the monk is twice as good, or even close.

The math does not say the monk is twice as good. The tier overlay says they are on opposite ends of the same tier, or perhaps since it's just shy of 100 you might say the monk is about 1 tier higher than a barbarian or fighter. 'Your system placed a monk up 1 tier from where it should be' is a lot less wacky than 'Your system says they're twice as good'.

Milskidasith
2010-07-30, 11:03 AM
The math does not say the monk is twice as good. The tier overlay says they are on opposite ends of the same tier, or perhaps since it's just shy of 100 you might say the monk is about 1 tier higher than a barbarian or fighter. 'Your system placed a monk up 1 tier from where it should be' is a lot less wacky than 'Your system says they're twice as good'.

Actually, since his system ignores a tier (it jumps from four to six... I assume five is 50-75 or so), it's putting the monk at the high end of T4 (which means he has ways to be useful in all situations and can, while not gamebreakingly contribute, still be good in most situations), and the barbarian in the low end of T5 (Barely capable of doing well at his own thing, probably not much above a warrior), is very, very inaccurate.

Psion is also too high, and the Rogue and (especially) the fighter are somewhat too low. Even for a system where the numbers are tweaked based on the established tier, this is inaccurate, and yes, a Monk having 90+ points when he should be just shy of 50 is a horrible flaw, as is a Barbarian (especially with variants factored in) barely having 50 when he should have around 70 or 80 points.

Beorn080
2010-07-30, 11:07 AM
Might I also suggest two sets of numbers. General proficiency and Combat Proficiency. That way you split up things like the Monk and Fighter issue. The Monk DOES have a lot of nifty powers, but almost none of them really matter in combat. Possibly great for RPing, but in a numbers sense, not so useful.

Milskidasith
2010-07-30, 11:08 AM
Might I also suggest two sets of numbers. General proficiency and Combat Proficiency. That way you split up things like the Monk and Fighter issue. The Monk DOES have a lot of nifty powers, but almost none of them really matter in combat. Possibly great for RPing, but in a numbers sense, not so useful.

D&D is 99% combat numbers, and all balance is done based on combat. Making a general number is rather pointless.

Plus, monks other abilities don't even help out of combat much, unless falling down walls slowly is necessary for diplomacy and the wizard doesn't have Feather Fall.

jseah
2010-07-30, 12:09 PM
This! This is helpful. It explains why Plane Shift is so much more powerful than Harm. Plane Shift is a Strategic Spell (you can change the battlefield, by leaving it, or moving the opponent, or by changing the environment in a fundamental way), whereas Harm is Tactical (Save or die ability). I might play with your multipliers, but I'm definitely going to try to incorporate the idea.
Glad you found that useful. After posting it on the BG boards as well (and garnering "what's this?" replies), I was beginning to wonder why I even made it in the first place.

Btw, I would rate Harm as technically DPS. Very very high DPS but with the following mitigating factors:
Save halves
Touch Range
Cannot Kill
Has insurmountable counter (Death Ward or being undead)


I could do another chart purely for monk abilities.

kestrel404
2010-07-30, 12:26 PM
@erom: That could help. I'll try something like that and see if it works out.

@Beorn080: My current ideas include something along those lines, except that the combat/non-combat effects act as multipliers for a single, cumulative score. A lot of the point here is to get a single numerical value for use in comparison. Getting two numbers will just confuse the issue further. But yeah, making a distinction between combat and non-combat abilities should help.

@Milskidasith: I put Tier 5 into my writeup. I thought I'd already done that, but apparently that edit never took. It was a typo from my original files that I've long since fixed.

And yes, I'd like the system to be able to distinguish between high and low tier. That's why I'm taking ideas from people who are willing to give them - the better I refine the system, the closer I should get to matching the Tier system.

jseah
2010-07-30, 01:09 PM
Here's monk:
http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh47/jon_seah/MonkAnalysis.jpg

Obviously of note, is that the monk has abilities all over the place.
On one hand, monk has lots of defensive abilities (weak though they are), some mobility options (limited use), action denial (which denies their own and is weak), and weak offensive abilities (due to 3/4 Bab and unable to use PA)
- But everything is weak and unsynergistic. They might be good at one area by focusing on it, but that means all of the others are bad.
- Eg. Monks can make a decent grappler... of humanoids. But get completely outclassed by monsters and simple FoM.

Here's Barbarian:
http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh47/jon_seah/BarbarianAnalysis.jpg

Barbarian gets rage. Which is overall nil on defense (+hp, -AC) but good DPS from +str dmg/to hit and ability to PA for more. Full Bab for good to-hit and dmg. And then it gets a better rage. And more of them, and then they get even better.
- Lion Totem Barbarian for pounce gets a massive boost in mobility (yes, Pounce is a mobility ability, not a DPS one), one that is not partially useless unlike slow fall or fast movement.

Stat synergy of abilities (Str, Con... that's it?)

---------------------------------------------------------

As a rule of thumb, abilities that add to the same general area as other abilities can be counted as synergistic.

Rage + Greater Rage + Mighty Rage are all DPS/To-Hit, which Full Bab is as well, it should get a large synergy bonus.

Tongue of the Sun and Moon is a weird outlier at information collection.
- A diviner will love this. A monk won't. That's because a Diviner has lots of abilities concerning gathering information and Tongue-- will synergise with their divination spells. (now the animals and plants are my eyes too!)



A better approximation would be to do a layout of commonly taken feats and check how much the class abilities overlap with those available. More overlap means the class should get a synergy bonus for being able to be boosted by general feats.
- Power Attack is a decisive DPS one.

Tyndmyr
2010-07-31, 01:19 AM
Well, there's that...

But I was actually referring to the whole package.

What makes barbarian particularly powerful? Rage is useful, especially for smart players who use rage judiciously and minimize the down time fatigue til after the fight. Trap sense is ok, Uncanny dodge is very useful at the start of a fight and in certain circumstances. DR is nice... fast movement is meh. I mean really, if a problem with monks is fast movement / FoB synergy, then barbarian also has the same issue with fast movement and a full attack with his good BAB... (and I'm taking vanilla barbi, not lion pounce barbi with her pink camero).

Stick with the basics. Rage is awesome. A barbarian dip is a great way to gain access to a solid str and con boost that stacks with everything. That's melee crack, right there.

Full BaB. Pretty much required to be a serious beatstick.

Fast movement...meh. It helps mitigate positioning issues if you're small, though that'd be unusual on a melee build. In general, each additional speed boost is worth less than the previous one, because it is useful in less and less situations. This is a minor bennie at best.

Uncanny Dodge is great. This makes a two level dip totally worth it. This is an ability that protects you against a commonly occurring scenario: Surprise. Generally a dangerous event, too. Abilities that remove weaknesses that commonly come up in games are generally quite handy.

The DR is minor, but together with a large hit die, it enables a barbarian to take a beating.

Basically, sum up the abilities. They make him very tough, and let him do more damage. Thats pretty much useful in any melee build.


Everything else the barbarian gets just boosts those abilities. All in all, decent for combat - increasing damage, hit, mitigation (at the cost of avoidance)... but since this is a combat oriented game, those are considered 'good' qualities.

Power of ability = frequency with which it occurs * additional power granted by having it.

So, something that gives you +2 to attacks(as just one component of rage) is very valuable. Sure, it's only a 10% increase in damage output...but it's something that's ALWAYS relevant.

Compare against, say, immunity to poison. First, that comes up relatively rarely. When it does come up, you already have a great fort save and most poison save DCs are easy to make. So, the added benefit provided by total immunity to poison is quite low.

Or consider the benefit provided by SR. I'll use monks as the example. You get SR = class level + 10. First off, lets look at commonality of use. Fairly common to be targeted by spells, though not as common as "makes a melee attack". You then need to factor out spells that do not allow SR, or do not target you. Then, consider the benefit granted each time. A bog standard caster of your level will pass the check on an 10+, or 55% of the time. Higher level casters and even mildly optimized opponents will have higher CLs, and thus, pass more often. As it's based on class level, it also becomes weaker if you multiclass. As a result, its not nearly as good as it seems at first.

Of particular note is that SR is most helpful against enemies below your power level. IE, those you need it least against. Abilities that make you strong against things you can already beat easily are of less value than those that let you defeat tougher things.


Monks on the other hand get a plethora of other powerful abilities; very fast movement,

The ability isn't powerful unless it gives you additional, yknow, options or effects as a player. If that fast movement isn't giving you an ability to reach an opponent in less rounds, it isn't doing anything that round.


increased AC

At the price of wearing armor. See, restrictions like that are significant. Not having armor and weapons are disadvantages. Bonuses to unarmed damage and AC cancel those disadvantages out, sure. But you can't just count the good, ignore the bad, and say something is awesome.


additional attacks in a round

There are attacks, and then there is damage. I've seen builds that center around throwing retarded amounts of shuriken every round. Lots of attacks, meh damage, especially when DR is involved. Getting caught up on number of attacks is again, focusing on just the best aspect of a given situation, and ignoring the downsides.


, resistances to all kinds of magical attacks (from base saves to Still Mind to Evasion and eventually SR), self heal, immunity to poison, ability to speak with anything... Teleportation, stunning blows, death attacks... In the right arena, all those are very powerful abilities, arguably better than +4 Str, +2 Con from rage.

Well, you compared everything a monk gets up until level 17 against an ability the barbarian gets at level one. And you underestimated the effect of that level one ability.

It's +4 Str, +4 Con, +2 Will saves. At level 1. And it gets better.


Its just that they don't help the monk in the one thing that anyone cares about: maximizing your DPS in a combat oriented game. And that's the problem.

What, they're diplomancers now, and nobody roleplays? Pah. It's not just about combat oriented or DPS junk. Sure, they fail at that, but if you want a social character or a skillmonkey, monk is not a great choice. Plenty of people embrace bards, rogues, etc.


In a game where you either need to do lots of DPS to get noticed, or be able to control the battlefield (or your opponents) so that you aren't overwhelmed by enemy DPS, you end up with two kinds of characters: blasters and gods. If you aren't one or the other, no matter how cool you are "off camera", you're relegated to the status of healbot. That's the monk's problem. Not enough damage over time to be useful, and practically null battlefield control - even their vaunted position of 'mage stopper' falls short primarily due to BAB issues.

No, Im pretty sure being relegated to "healbot" is not the monk's problem. Nor are they terribly vaunted for being mage stoppers.


But! in games where DPS isn't as important; infiltration, cloak & dagger, social interaction, rescuing the damsel in distress, etc, their abilities will shine brighter than your optimized barbi that does 400+ points of damage a round.

That's what I mean.

Er...I think you need to play more D&D and less WoW. DPS isn't really the primary criteria of awesome characters. It's a part, sure, but full casters are lauded as powerful because they can do all those things you mentioned above. In addition to combat. The monk is moderate at best at infiltration, cloak and dagger, social interaction, etc. It's not really good at any of these roles.

Tyndmyr
2010-07-31, 01:23 AM
Oh, on the original topic, if you want to just measure based on feats, I suspect you'll need to find standard feats, and standardize valuation of them.

For instance, how valuable is +2 Reflex saves compared to +3 hp, or +1 attack with a given weapon type? Once you have a basic standard to compare, you can calculate the value of a lot of feats.