PDA

View Full Version : Party vs. Party Class Balance



Jack Zander
2011-03-16, 12:55 AM
So I starting running a more tactical campaign where the players often fight other small forces similar to themselves of humanoid opponents with class levels near equal to their own (but seriously gimped on wealth to keep WBL mostly intact).

What I found is that the classes are actually pretty much balanced when they aren't fighting monsters. A mage will dominate the encounter when there is no other mage present, but I usually have at least one mage in each enemy party and it often becomes a battle of counterspelling, silencing, and dispelling while the fighters actually take out the opponents. With multiple mages on each team, most save or suck spells usually don't last more than 1 round. The battle becomes an effort to neutralize the opposing casters, and the less magical characters play a big role in that.

I had the misfortune of criting two players and causing a TPK. I was going to fudge because stray crits for max aren't cool in my book, but they told me I shouldn't so we kept it and well, 2 rounds later the party was wiped. They decided to make an all wizard party. Granted, this was only level 3, but the wizards had such a hard time dealing actual damage that all their webs, greases and glitterdusts simply weren't enough to actually take out any of the enemies. It just simply delayed and annoyed them for several rounds until they finally broke out or the effects wore off. Even with one wizard being built to handle physical attacks as well as a wizard could at his level plus another one being an evoker (they figured they had enough wizards in the other departments that they could use at least one focused on blasting), they simply couldn't actually bring any one creature down.

Now granted this was only tested at level 3, but I have a feeling that even at later levels, the mages of each group will spend so much of their time undoing the other's effects that the fight will still mostly be determined by which side has their fighters hit the hardest.

Also, if any of you enjoy tactical combat, I highly recommend playing a game like this. The only downside is that it takes quite a bit of preparation from the DM, as I typically have to make at least 3 new NPCs each session. I can only recycle so many before the group levels up, plus it is boring to have the players fight "Ranger level 3" over and over again. Also, expect each combat to last an entire game session, assuming a party of near equal strength and numbers. However, each combat becomes very interesting and worth the extra time each turn takes, aside from the cleanup rounds maybe.

Ducklord
2011-03-16, 04:44 AM
Well, yeah, at lvl 3 the wizards will probably get smashed, but try running a 4 wizards party against a regular 4 man party at lvl 10. Or lvl 15. In the earlier levels the wizard is weaker than the meleers of the group, but from lvl 6 on things start changing. At lvl 7 a single Black Tentacles can disable & kill an entire party.

Jack Zander
2011-03-16, 10:32 AM
Well, yeah, at lvl 3 the wizards will probably get smashed, but try running a 4 wizards party against a regular 4 man party at lvl 10. Or lvl 15. In the earlier levels the wizard is weaker than the meleers of the group, but from lvl 6 on things start changing. At lvl 7 a single Black Tentacles can disable & kill an entire party.

Right, but what I'm saying is that when the other team has their own wizards/clerics, they have access to spells like dispel magic and freedom of movement and can undo or counterspell any effect your wizard gets off.

Teron
2011-03-16, 11:05 AM
Your account doesn't really make the classes sound balanced... it sounds more like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-qLC_ptImo).

Jack Zander
2011-03-16, 11:57 AM
Your account doesn't really make the classes sound balanced... it sounds more like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-qLC_ptImo).

Maybe a better way to describe the situation then is: The fighters can meaningfully contribute when the mages are busy countering each other.

Oracle_Hunter
2011-03-16, 12:55 PM
Eh, they're doing it wrong.

They should make an all druid party. That way they can out-magic their opponents and let their animal companions play Fighter :smallamused:

Jack Zander
2011-03-16, 01:03 PM
Eh, they're doing it wrong.

They should make an all druid party. That way they can out-magic their opponents and let their animal companions play Fighter :smallamused:

Yeah, unfortunately for them, I nerfed druid to the point of being useful only as a summoner. No animal companion (and ranger gets full progression) and no wildshape.

mangosta71
2011-03-16, 01:14 PM
If the NPC party only has 1 mage, the PCs can have 2 blasters along with the controller. Only one of them can be counterspelled per round, which leaves the other free to put the enemy mage down and then they're both free to kill the rest of the opposing group, which the third PC mage has been keeping locked down.

Ducklord
2011-03-16, 01:18 PM
Well, the enemy casters can try to undo what your mages are trying to do, but at 4:1 or 4:2 at best the action economy works in favour of 4 wizards. Casters dominate high level play, it's pretty common knowledge. I won't argue that giving the enemy some casting capability can help balance things out though.

Jack Zander
2011-03-16, 01:18 PM
If the NPC party only has 1 mage, the PCs can have 2 blasters along with the controller. Only one of them can be counterspelled per round, which leaves the other free to put the enemy mage down and then they're both free to kill the rest of the opposing group, which the third PC mage has been keeping locked down.

That's a big "if" when 5/11 base classes are major spellcasters (and since I banned monks, paladins, and sorcerers for flavor reasons it actually comes to 4/7 in this campaign).


Well, the enemy casters can try to undo what your mages are trying to do, but at 4:1 or 4:2 at best the action economy works in favour of 4 wizards. Casters dominate high level play, it's pretty common knowledge. I won't argue that giving the enemy some casting capability can help balance things out though.

Yeah, casters are still going to be the MVPs, but what I'm saying is that in party vs party play, the fighters can still feel important and contribute in a fight. In fact, having your mage assist the fighter in reaching the other squishy guy on their team and then dispelling his defenses when the fighter gets there is a very effective strategy.

Oracle_Hunter
2011-03-16, 01:19 PM
Yeah, unfortunately for them, I nerfed druid to the point of being useful only as a summoner. No animal companion (and ranger gets full progression) and no wildshape.
Heh.

Well, they'd still be better as Clerics. Spontaneous Healing plus enough armor & weapons to fake a Fighter if need be.

Besides, how are enemies getting access to Dispel Magic at LV 3? Last I checked, you needed to be LV 5 to cast it :smallconfused:

EDIT: Also, isn't you argument about balance somewhat invalidated if you're engaging in such massive houseruling? :smalltongue:

Jack Zander
2011-03-16, 01:32 PM
Besides, how are enemies getting access to Dispel Magic at LV 3? Last I checked, you needed to be LV 5 to cast it :smallconfused:

EDIT: Also, isn't you argument about balance somewhat invalidated if you're engaging in such massive houseruling? :smalltongue:

There are other ways of dispelling other than dispel magic, such as certain spells that oppose each other, or any fire spell to destroy a web.

And God... not even I'm going to try to argue that druids are balanced out of the box. All I'm trying to say is that when the enemy has access to the same stuff you do, combat as a whole doesn't become so one-sided anymore.

Oracle_Hunter
2011-03-16, 01:39 PM
There are other ways of dispelling other than dispel magic, such as certain spells that oppose each other, or any fire spell to destroy a web.

And God... not even I'm going to try to argue that druids are balanced out of the box. All I'm trying to say is that when the enemy has access to the same stuff you do, combat as a whole doesn't become so one-sided anymore.
Mirror matches are generally balanced, yes - in the sense that no side has an inherent advantage over the other. But that doesn't make an interesting fight, per se. In a rocket fight, it doesn't matter if both sides have rockets; it only matters which side hits first. The fact that you've discovered that Fighters Matter (only when there are no unopposed casters) isn't terribly surprising in that light.