Whats this E6 business I keep reading about?

[JoeYounger]

Am I ignorant to some fancy campaign setting out there? Or is this a homebrewed world?

Please halp! lol

[gbprime]

Variant rules system. Characters level normally to level 6, and no further. After that, every 5000 xp gets you a bonus feat. Very good for low-magic systems or worlds where mortals can only get so powerful compared to the threats in the world.

[Hiro Protagonest]

How hard is it to do this (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=D%26D+E6)?

[Coidzor]

Possibly originating thread. (http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=200754)

[TroubleBrewing]

How hard is it to do this (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=D%26D+E6)?

Gah, you beat me to it.

I've had to resort to this 3 times this week alone.

[No brains]

How hard is it to do this (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=D%26D+E6)?

God I hate that.:smallmad: People ask question on a forum hoping for someone to give a summarized explanation without having to pull open a manual on a subject. Often googling something will give an overly deep review of something that is simply tl;dr.

That said, E6 is a variant ruleset where you cap sixth level but keep getting feats. It's supposed to help low-magic campaigns that want to be between gritty and heroic fantasy without getting to crazy levels of power.

[Venger]

Yes, as already said, it's when you cap leveling up at level 6, which stops casters at 3rd level spells, enabling you to have them avoid circumventing "low level" challenges that could be given the automatic no by higher level spells

it's especially useful to people who are new to the game so they don't have a ton of stuff to keep track of. it's also nice for melee-oriented characters since the discrepancy between them and the casters is closed a little bit.

[Weimann]

While it fixes some of the power discrepancy, it still doesn't touch the core problem of casters getting cool stuff that melee classes cannot get.

Have a look at this (great) E6 homebrew (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=215986). Yes, melee classes are buffed, and casters are limited to their 3rd level spells. Still, the class I want to play the most is the Red Mage, because it's a melee class that also get to throw fire around. If melee classes could do stuff like that, or if you could be a melee class and still use magic, much would be improved.

[Venger]

While it fixes some of the power discrepancy, it still doesn't touch the core problem of casters getting cool stuff that melee classes cannot get.

Have a look at this (great) E6 homebrew (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=215986). Yes, melee classes are buffed, and casters are limited to their 3rd level spells. Still, the class I want to play the most is the Red Mage, because it's a melee class that also get to throw fire around. If melee classes could do stuff like that, or if you could be a melee class and still use magic, much would be improved.

you could also make ice 9 jokes

[JoeYounger]

God I hate that.:smallmad: People ask question on a forum hoping for someone to give a summarized explanation without having to pull open a manual on a subject. Often googling something will give an overly deep review of something that is simply tl;dr.

That said, E6 is a variant ruleset where you cap sixth level but keep getting feats. It's supposed to help low-magic campaigns that want to be between gritty and heroic fantasy without getting to crazy levels of power.

Thanks for not being a **** :D

[Tyndmyr]

Variant rules system. Characters level normally to level 6, and no further. After that, every 5000 xp gets you a bonus feat. Very good for low-magic systems or worlds where mortals can only get so powerful compared to the threats in the world.

More correctly, it has a slower rate of advancement once you hit the level cap.

There really isn't an upper limit on power per se, but when your best option for an hp boosting feat is toughness, it certainly does slow down.

[Gullintanni]

you could also make ice 9 jokes

Just write it in under "Spells you can only cast with a Bag of Holding". :smallamused:

Seriously...the basic gist of E6 is that it's a set of houserules, designed to end character by-level progression at level 6, and progress power by feats every 5000xp. E6 essentially limits (without extreme cheese) viable enemy CR to around 9-12 by the time your players have enough exp to have attained level 20 in Vanilla D&D.

That said, this is a simple explanation that really doesn't do the system justice. Hit the thread down at EnWorld. It's a good (and not terribly long) read, and really gives you a basis for how E6 is supposed to function as intended.

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=enworld%20e6&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.enworld.org%2Fforum%2Fgeneral-rpg-discussion%2F206323-e6-game-inside-d-d.html&ei=6nnCTvm2FKnA0AGd_OmPDw&usg=AFQjCNHyHRkROPZ4_UmVGqZ9rIFLY23d7A&cad=rja

As mentioned, it's great for a more gritty, heroic style of game where monsters like Minotaurs and Manticores represent the menacing threats to civilian populations that they ought to, and even the mightiest heroes are still only mortal.

Edit: This also has a corollary effect of not having to design towns with Level 10+ guards just to protect cities from PCs. Which is kind of nice because I mean at that point, why aren't the guards just protecting the cities from everything. Who needs PCs at all, right? :smalltongue:

[Eldan]

With medium levels of cheese, though, you can easily learn ninth level spells. Or make immortal characters. Or anything else you can think of, really.

[Gullintanni]

With enough cheese, though, you can break any variant of D&D forever.

FTFY :smallamused:

As with regular D&D, reasonable prohibition of cheese is necessary to keep your game running the way you want it to.

[Tyndmyr]

E6 essentially limits (without extreme cheese) viable enemy CR to around 9-12 by the time your players have enough exp to have attained level 20 in Vanilla D&D.

Results may vary depending on optimization level, ban lists, and house rules.

Note that several entries in the "kill a balor in E6" including mine, used no infinite loops or dodgy interpretations such as higher level spells than the chars natively had access to.

Feats are quite powerful, if you select them decently at all.

[Knaight]

Results may vary depending on optimization level, ban lists, and house rules.

Note that several entries in the "kill a balor in E6" including mine, used no infinite loops or dodgy interpretations such as higher level spells than the chars natively had access to.

Still, if you are trying to keep characters more mortal and less powerful e6 does make life easier. Granted, if you ignore D&D, WoD, Exalted, and the superhero genre e6 still looks like an incredibly high powered game system, but it does mortal heroics better than D&D with a full 20 (or 30) levels.

[Tyndmyr]

Still, if you are trying to keep characters more mortal and less powerful e6 does make life easier. Granted, if you ignore D&D, WoD, Exalted, and the superhero genre e6 still looks like an incredibly high powered game system, but it does mortal heroics better than D&D with a full 20 (or 30) levels.

It's an interesting system if you like slower progression at level six. That's really all it is. A fun alternative mechanical option that some enjoy in some settings.

The "mortal heroics" bit is based on the wildly flawed Alexandrian article. E6 is not particularly mortal or realistic compared to D&D in general. You still have flying and teleportation and other craziness. HP, alignment, etc are no more realistic at level 6 + lots of feats than at level 20. Nor is a heavily CL boosted fireball more realistic than a higher level blasting spell.

[Knaight]

The "mortal heroics" bit is based on the wildly flawed Alexandrian article. E6 is not particularly mortal or realistic compared to D&D in general. You still have flying and teleportation and other craziness. HP, alignment, etc are no more realistic at level 6 + lots of feats than at level 20. Nor is a heavily CL boosted fireball more realistic than a higher level blasting spell.
Have you seen how unrealistic literature about mortal heroes gets? Ignoring overt magic in fantasy (which is fine), its not exactly uncommon for characters to get in fights with a half dozen people and win, or ride through an army and snatch away its general, or any of a whole bunch of other things. However, what does remain is the way the characters are still threatened by human threats to some extent. Conan is not realistic, and could be described as level 6, but if Conan were to try and get in a stand off fight against a bunch of armored horsemen he would lose, and he is forced to resort to trickery and subtlety. A level 6 character which is not deliberately made for power but is made to remain fairly low down is in a similar situation. A level 20 character in a game optimized for a low power level probably still laughs at armies.

[Zaranthan]

Edit: This also has a corollary effect of not having to design towns with Level 10+ guards just to protect cities from PCs. Which is kind of nice because I mean at that point, why aren't the guards just protecting the cities from everything. Who needs PCs at all, right? :smalltongue:

Or you could design a world where the players are not the only adventurers in existence. For an example of good town design, check out Hommlet from Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil. The town is run by a level 10 wizard and level 8 fighter, both of whom are retired adventurers, neither of whom will get involved in a local brouhaha unless it's something the level 3 guards and level 5 captain can't handle (hence why they haven't gone out and solved the adventure already: they're done stabbing minotaurs in the face for a few bits of shiny metal).

[Tyndmyr]

Have you seen how unrealistic literature about mortal heroes gets? Ignoring overt magic in fantasy (which is fine), its not exactly uncommon for characters to get in fights with a half dozen people and win, or ride through an army and snatch away its general, or any of a whole bunch of other things. However, what does remain is the way the characters are still threatened by human threats to some extent. Conan is not realistic, and could be described as level 6, but if Conan were to try and get in a stand off fight against a bunch of armored horsemen he would lose, and he is forced to resort to trickery and subtlety. A level 6 character which is not deliberately made for power but is made to remain fairly low down is in a similar situation. A level 20 character in a game optimized for a low power level probably still laughs at armies.

A level 6 warlock with a giant pile o' feats has more in common with Superman than he does with Conan.

[vitkiraven]

A level 6 warlock with a giant pile o' feats has more in common with Superman than he does with Conan.
And a Barbarian 2 Warblade 4 (or something similar) with a giant pile of feats probably resembles Conan quite nicely. It is all in what role you want to pursue, and how much magic is cheesed.
:biggrin:

[Tyndmyr]

And a Barbarian 2 Warblade 4 (or something similar) with a giant pile of feats probably resembles Conan quite nicely. It is all in what role you want to pursue, and how much magic is cheesed.
:biggrin:

That char will continue to represent a Conanesque char as he levels up, E6 or not.

The warlock really doesn't from level one.

It ain't a level thing, it's a class thing.

[Knaight]

That char will continue to represent a Conanesque char as he levels up, E6 or not.
The level 20 barbarian who casually jumps chasms, fights armies, and wrestles dragons (admittedly, stupid dragons who overestimate themselves) does not resemble Conan. Beowolf or Achilles is closer.

[Tyndmyr]

The level 20 barbarian who casually jumps chasms, fights armies, and wrestles dragons (admittedly, stupid dragons who overestimate themselves) does not resemble Conan. Beowolf or Achilles is closer.

Conan has pulled off some fairly amazing jump checks and other str based skills. He has most certainly fought armies of men. I don't know if he's wrestled a dragon specifically, but he most certainly has fought and killed a wild variety of monsters, including huge stuff.

Also note that a standard human barbarian will autofail grapples against the sort of dragons you encounter at CR 20 due to size differences. So, there's really not a realism problem there.

[DrDeth]

What is E6? Dull. D-U-L-L. Dull. We all know the “sweet spot” in D&D is around 7th level. You are powerful enuf to be heroes without being too powerful. This idea would stop short of the sweet spot. Now sure, many games stop somewhere in the double digits. Few go to Epic. But this takes it to a extreme. Might as well all play 0 level commoners with a pointy stick.

[Knaight]

We all know the “sweet spot” in D&D is around 7th level. You are powerful enuf to be heroes without being too powerful. This idea would stop short of the sweet spot.
A few things.
1) The existence of a sweet spot is not universally agreed upon.
2) That said sweet spot is around level 7 is not universally agreed upon.
3) E6 characters do advance to the equivalent of level 7 fairly quickly, so it doesn't actually stop short of that "sweet spot".
{{scrubbed}}

[Tyndmyr]

What is E6? Dull. D-U-L-L. Dull. We all know the “sweet spot” in D&D is around 7th level. You are powerful enuf to be heroes without being too powerful. This idea would stop short of the sweet spot. Now sure, many games stop somewhere in the double digits. Few go to Epic. But this takes it to a extreme. Might as well all play 0 level commoners with a pointy stick.

I'm not going to go that far. Dullness is highly subjective, and the sweet spot extends for more than one level. Depending on play preferences, level six might in fact fall within it, and as already mentioned, while advancement slows, it does not entirely stop. So, level seven realms of power are quite easily achievable.

The choice to play E6 or not almost entirely rests on how comfortable you are with advancement speed. Popping quickly through the rocket taggy levels is often seen as desirable, but once past them, many prefer a slower advancement rate, but do not wish to alter the rate of xp.

[gbprime]

What is E6? Dull. D-U-L-L. Dull. We all know the “sweet spot” in D&D is around 7th level. You are powerful enuf to be heroes without being too powerful. This idea would stop short of the sweet spot. Now sure, many games stop somewhere in the double digits. Few go to Epic. But this takes it to a extreme. Might as well all play 0 level commoners with a pointy stick.

well that's just it, it's not meant to be your average D+D game, it's designed to be low powered. Low fantasy, low magic. It's not for everybody, but the d20 rules without such modification can't really support it.

[vitkiraven]

What is E6? Dull. D-U-L-L. Dull. We all know the “sweet spot” in D&D is around 7th level. You are powerful enuf to be heroes without being too powerful. This idea would stop short of the sweet spot. Now sure, many games stop somewhere in the double digits. Few go to Epic. But this takes it to a extreme. Might as well all play 0 level commoners with a pointy stick.
Odd, I find levels above 6 to be a dreary dull bore, as the cheesy wizard oneshots encounters with his schroedingers spell list of doom, but that's as a player, not being the spellcaster. I find the gritty action of looking death in the face, having bravery in the face of doom, and challenging the certain doom of the dice gods with my pewter d20 to be a lot more thrilling. Then again gouda-casters can oneshot poorly planned encounters from level one, so ymmv.

[noparlpf]

This looks...beautiful. I love low levels. I very well may switch to this to set up a campaign for some newbie players. It definitely looks easier to set up a campaign with only levels 1-6 and slightly more realistic fantasy.

[MukkTB]

I like the variant where you throw out anything a vanilla 6th level character couldn't do. Particularly 4th level spells.

The big benefit for world building in E6 is you don't have to wonder why the Tippyverse hasn't developed yet if you're trying to play a fairly generic setting.

[Hiro Protagonest]

What is E6? Dull. D-U-L-L. Dull. We all know the “sweet spot” in D&D is around 7th level. You are powerful enuf to be heroes without being too powerful. This idea would stop short of the sweet spot. Now sure, many games stop somewhere in the double digits. Few go to Epic. But this takes it to a extreme. Might as well all play 0 level commoners with a pointy stick.

Let me guess. You like to play full casters.

[dextercorvia]

With medium levels of cheese, though, you can easily learn ninth level spells. Or make immortal characters. Or anything else you can think of, really.

I approve of your opinion of medium levels of cheese.

[Morty]

If I ever play D&D again, it'll likely be E6, if I find a PbP E6 game or persuade a RL group to play it. D&D gets far too powerful for my tastes on higher levels and E6 allows for moderate heroism, where the PCs are strong and somewhat larger-than-life but not absurdly so.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Eh, most of the games I play are de facto E6 anyway. The campaign ends before we get much higher than that. I'd like to actually play a game from 1 to 20 one of these days, assuming gentlemen's agreements.

[navar100]

Let me guess. You like to play full casters.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

E6 is not for everyone.

[Gullintanni]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

E6 is not for everyone.

Eh...Full Caster 20 increases book keeping, character imbalances and planning requirements for a campaign substantially. It also generally leads to characters being closer to gods than men.

If you're looking to avoid that, then Full Caster 20 IS a bad thing. If you prefer that kind of setting though, then by all means more power to you. As always, ymmv.


I like the variant where you throw out anything a vanilla 6th level character couldn't do. Particularly 4th level spells.

The big benefit for world building in E6 is you don't have to wonder why the Tippyverse hasn't developed yet if you're trying to play a fairly generic setting.

And I do agree with this. Base 6 is pretty much how my E6 runs...that is, if you can't do it at base caster/character level 6, then you can't do it in my campaign. I find this creates the power ceiling (barring of course the ever present cheese of D&D CharOp) that E6 is striving to create.

[Tyndmyr]

I like the variant where you throw out anything a vanilla 6th level character couldn't do. Particularly 4th level spells.

The big benefit for world building in E6 is you don't have to wonder why the Tippyverse hasn't developed yet if you're trying to play a fairly generic setting.

Strictly speaking, magical traps are doable in E6. So, the idea of people bunkering up in towns to best take advantage of what little magic is available is still pretty logical. In E6, it often makes LESS sense for everyday chars to live in the middle of the wilderness. After all, monsters still exist. When your average dude has a lack of magic, levels and options, he's more vulnerable to such things.


I approve of your opinion of medium levels of cheese.

He's right though. Immortal chars in E6 are remarkably easy. Pick the right race or template, and you're done. In fact, the E6 rules encourage template and la abuse, allowing some rather crazy stuff that isn't nearly as profitable in normal D&D.

[dextercorvia]

He's right though. Immortal chars in E6 are remarkably easy. Pick the right race or template, and you're done. In fact, the E6 rules encourage template and la abuse, allowing some rather crazy stuff that isn't nearly as profitable in normal D&D.

I was there for the Balor challenge, I know. Now, I'm less familiar with template abuse... What kinds of things are we talking about?

[DrDeth]

Let me guess. You like to play full casters.

Actually no. Right now I have a Warblade 14 in my highest level game. In another game I have a DN 6 (and in PF I have a Bard 5, a Inq 5 and a Dwarf Sorc 3) But like I said, the sweet spot for all classes is around 7. Maybe 5-10. E6 cuts out 4 levels of the best playing. Levles 1-4 are also boring even for tanks, healers and skillmonkeys. Too easy to die by a single critical hit from a minion. Not fun for anyone.

Now sure, I have played Epic games, and up there thing can also drag on and get boring. But most campaigns end before they get Epic anyway.

It’s not a choice between E6 and Fullcaster 20 anyway. I think that around 12 or so is when to start thinking of a campaign.

[Tyndmyr]

I was there for the Balor challenge, I know. Now, I'm less familiar with template abuse... What kinds of things are we talking about?

LA of all types doesn't exist in E6. That arguably extends to templates as well(E6 rules don't cover acquired templates at all, but at least initial templates should follow the racial rules). So, any template that offers more stats you want than you'd lose from the point buy...take it. And that's the conservative reading.

Also, necropolitan is pretty fantastic in E6. Lost xp? Meh, you'll get it back. Look, you now live forever and have a pile of immunities. No LA, so no ambiguities there.

Note also that while acquired templates have no actual way to pay for costs after initial char creation, E6 explicitly calls them out as a way to advance once you have reached level six. You can gain a LOT of power by picking the right templates. Ghost is one hilarious option, for example.

[Coidzor]

Let me guess. You like to play full casters.

Pure casters still have their toys, it's Gishes that e6 was out to screw. But that's right and proper, as 3.X was out to screw them too anyway.

[Curious]

Pure casters still have their toys, it's Gishes that e6 was out to screw. But that's right and proper, as 3.X was out to screw them too anyway.

'Cept the Duskblade and Magus!

. . . And Mystic Wildshape Sword of the Arcane Order Rangers.

[Zonugal]

E6 is also a phenomenal system when looking to adapt superheroes/pop culture characters as more often than not feats become more vital than levels.

[Tyndmyr]

Pure casters still have their toys, it's Gishes that e6 was out to screw. But that's right and proper, as 3.X was out to screw them too anyway.

Honestly, the easiest way to play a gish in E6 is to just roll up a caster with melee friendly templates and hybrid stats. Half dragon whatever sorcerer is core, pretty unlikely to be banned. Sure, you only have 10 points left on your point buy instead of 32, but an 18 str, a 16 cha and 10 con burns your entire point buy on 32 pt buy anyway.

Adding half dragon means you get all that(and can do better if you shuffle some of that cha into str or con), get a bonus +2 int for free, some mediocre natural attacks, a handy breath weapon that's fairly relevant at level 6, an elemental immunity, a solid natural armor boost, darkvision, and immunity to sleep/paralysis.

Note that half dragon paragon advances sorc casting, has d12s, and gives you more toys. Levels in sorc give you jack other than sorc casting, so there's no reason NOT to do this instead of low level sorc levels.

If you're willing to embrace other sources or greater cheese, much better gishes are possible. Skillmonkey is really the role that gets screwed.

[Coidzor]

'Cept the Duskblade and Magus!

Duskblade isn't a real gish any more than a hexblade is. :smalltongue: And Magus isn't even part of 3.X.

[Tyndmyr]

Duskblade isn't a real gish any more than a hexblade is. :smalltongue: And Magus isn't even part of 3.X.

Duskblade's a Gish, sure. But yeah, you can do a lot better than Duskblade 6.

[dextercorvia]

LA of all types doesn't exist in E6. That arguably extends to templates as well(E6 rules don't cover acquired templates at all, but at least initial templates should follow the racial rules). So, any template that offers more stats you want than you'd lose from the point buy...take it. And that's the conservative reading.

Also, necropolitan is pretty fantastic in E6. Lost xp? Meh, you'll get it back. Look, you now live forever and have a pile of immunities. No LA, so no ambiguities there.

Note also that while acquired templates have no actual way to pay for costs after initial char creation, E6 explicitly calls them out as a way to advance once you have reached level six. You can gain a LOT of power by picking the right templates. Ghost is one hilarious option, for example.

I knew the alternate payment rules, I just never tried to exploit them. I also wasn't thinking of unlife as immortality. Thanks for the explanation. I'll have to consider which templates are worthwhile.

[Tytalus]

Also, necropolitan is pretty fantastic in E6. Lost xp? Meh, you'll get it back. Look, you now live forever and have a pile of immunities. No LA, so no ambiguities there.


It's even better in regular D&D, where the XP difference is much less of a concern.


L
Note also that while acquired templates have no actual way to pay for costs after initial char creation, E6 explicitly calls them out as a way to advance once you have reached level six. You can gain a LOT of power by picking the right templates. Ghost is one hilarious option, for example.

Acquiring templates after character creation is not part of E6, unless your are talking about other house rules.

Ghost is not an option on E6 either, which only caters to LAs of up to +4.

[Tytalus]

Duskblade's a Gish, sure. But yeah, you can do a lot better than Duskblade 6.

Really? Without cheese?

Duskblade 6 is very solid in E6.

[Rubik]

Ghost is not an option on E6 either, which only caters to LAs of up to +4.The ghost savage progression allows you to take levels in it instead of other levels. A single level rocks hard for defenses.

[dextercorvia]

Really? Without cheese?

Duskblade 6 is very solid in E6.

Mystic Ranger with SotAO.

Stalwart Battle Sorcerer is also a possibility.

[Tytalus]

The ghost savage progression allows you to take levels in it instead of other levels. A single level rocks hard for defenses.

Good point, although that's not what he was talking about. The online progressions are somewhat problematic anyway, IMHO, and ghost in particular - etheralness has considerable implications on the game. At least the progression has a big "talk to your DM" note in it...


Mystic Ranger with SotAO.

Stalwart Battle Sorcerer is also a possibility.

Yes, Mystic Ranger with SotAO is a fantastic option in low-mid level play (up to lvl 10), which includes E6 - primarily due to its broken spell progression (a secondary caster that advances spell levels as fast as a primary caster). I'd call that cheese, but YMMV, obviously. It also requires Dragon material, plus a setting-specific feat, so it's likely not an option for many gaming groups.

I personally don't see a stalwart battle sorcerer as being "a lot" better than a duskblade. 3rd level spells, larger spell list and HP speak for the SBS, but BAB (iterative attacks), saves, spells per day and (relevant!) class features for the duskblade. YMMV.

[Coidzor]

YMMV.

Clearly, given the duskblade's spell list.

[dextercorvia]

I personally don't see a stalwart battle sorcerer as being "a lot" better than a duskblade. 3rd level spells, larger spell list and HP speak for the SBS, but BAB (iterative attacks), saves, spells per day and (relevant!) class features for the duskblade. YMMV.

Spell list (as was mentioned). 2 points of BAB aren't going to have a significant effect as a Duskblade will be using standard action Arcane Channeling. Battle Sorcerer is the only way to get Arcane Strike in E6 without using early spell shenanigans. So a Kobold Sorcerer gets 3 attacks per round each hitting for an extra Xd6 depending on available spell slots. (Cheese ahead) Throw in Half-Minotaur for amazing increase to your stats, and you get an extra Gore attack.

An E6 Duskblade can not benefit from more than one attack per round and his main class feature at the same time.

[Tyndmyr]

It's even better in regular D&D, where the XP difference is much less of a concern.

Being behind a level for a while is a noticeable power hit. One the template is well worth, sure. Being a feat behind...much less so. Very few feats are worth a class level...and it being E6, you'll take those anyway.


Acquiring templates after character creation is not part of E6, unless your are talking about other house rules.

It explicitly refers to advancing creatures via templates. So, templates are a thing. Note that several acquired templates are done so via transmission, disease style. So, if you're applying say, were-whatever to a monster, a player logically can end up with it.

If they *cant*, then you end up with a severe "why" issue.


Ghost is not an option on E6 either, which only caters to LAs of up to +4.

Look in Ghostwalk.


Really? Without cheese?

Duskblade 6 is very solid in E6.

Half Dragon Human Sorc 2/Half Dragon Paragon 3/Sorc Prc1, as already demonstrated, will give you 4 BaB(well, 4.5 using fractional, if the PrC is half BaB) and full sorc 6 casting. This gives you a vastly better spell list than Duskblade, favorable stats, fun alternative options, a nice dose of natural armor, etc.

That's pretty cheese free, and quite justifiably superior. Doesn't really involve much splatbook diving either, considering the only non-core source is half dragon paragon. If you WANTED cheese, you could improve it substantially.

[dextercorvia]

Half Dragon Human Sorc 2/Half Dragon Paragon 3/Sorc Prc1, as already demonstrated, will give you 4 BaB(well, 4.5 using fractional, if the PrC is half BaB) and full sorc 6 casting. This gives you a vastly better spell list than Duskblade, favorable stats, fun alternative options, a nice dose of natural armor, etc.

That's pretty cheese free, and quite justifiably superior. Doesn't really involve much splatbook diving either, considering the only non-core source is half dragon paragon. If you WANTED cheese, you could improve it substantially.

Full Sorcerer6 CL, but not spells. Half-Dragon Paragon doesn't advance spells.

[Venger]

Ghost is not an option on E6 either, which only caters to LAs of up to +4.


The ghost savage progression allows you to take levels in it instead of other levels. A single level rocks hard for defenses.

While the savage progressions do RAW allow you to multiclass freely (unlike the progressions in savage species which they are ostensibly based off of) doing so is somewhat gauche and most DMs will not allow it.

this is probably because they thought you actually wanted to take the class all the way through

good luck running into an enemy with a ghost touch weapon in E6, btw (trollface.jpg)

[dextercorvia]

While the savage progressions do RAW allow you to multiclass freely (unlike the progressions in savage species which they are ostensibly based off of) doing so is somewhat gauche and most DMs will not allow it.

They may allow you to take it as the last level of your build.

[Tyndmyr]

Full Sorcerer6 CL, but not spells. Half-Dragon Paragon doesn't advance spells.

Oops, that's an error on my part. That said, I'd rather have partial sorc casting than full duskblade casting.

Hell, I'd rather go straight sorc 6. Hp can be fixed with feats. Attack bonus can be fixed with feats. Adding casting via feats requires fairly notable cheese that will probably not be permitted in practice.

[Terazul]

What is E6? Dull. D-U-L-L. Dull. We all know the “sweet spot” in D&D is around 7th level. You are powerful enuf to be heroes without being too powerful. This idea would stop short of the sweet spot. Now sure, many games stop somewhere in the double digits. Few go to Epic. But this takes it to a extreme. Might as well all play 0 level commoners with a pointy stick.
:smallconfused: I personally always found 10-12 to be the sweet spot. Around then characters have 3-4 feats from levels and 2-3 stat ups, so certain feat trees are filling out. By this point a character can also have completed a 5 level PrC, be halfway through a standard 10 level one, or simply start getting to the "juicy" abilities of their chosen base class (Dominant Ideal Ardent, and that Totemist thing, I'm looking at you) and thus start to come online with their individual specializations or tricks. The fancier/more powerful abilities can be used more often, and you can start dealing with "bigger" enemies because you actually have one or more methods of dealing with them.

That said, I actually had quite a bit of fun in E6 (Dungeoncrasher Go!), and particularly like the LA/Point-Buy rules. The DM I was playing under at the time also liked the Death Flag/Action point optional rules, since we were playing with a bunch of new people and it encouraged them to be more willing to take risks without fear of losing their characters, meanwhile us veterans could go full swing and just enjoy the extra action points.

I think we were also using the betting rules, which let the less mechanically savvy players come up with ways to achieve neat ideas. Simply saying they'll try to pull some sort of wacky stunt to flip over them and drop the chandelier on the bad guy, and then accepting a die roll and an agreed upon failure penalty works better dramatically than a bunch of jump, tumble, and use rope/attack roll checks.

[Eldan]

I approve of your opinion of medium levels of cheese.

It's not very cheesy. You need, like, a handful of feats.

High cheese, to me, is the really TO stuff that no one can use in a game. Infinite loops, pun-pun hood and so on. Making a feat loop to get 9th level spells is comparably tame. (Depending on what you do with those spells).

[Gullintanni]

It's not very cheesy. You need, like, a handful of feats.

High cheese, to me, is the really TO stuff that no one can use in a game. Infinite loops, pun-pun hood and so on. Making a feat loop to get 9th level spells is comparably tame. (Depending on what you do with those spells).

Eh...IMHO, level of cheese is proportional to the absurdity of results attained; not the ease of acquisition. Using Feats to pick up 9th level spells at level 6 (11 levels early) is, therefore, pretty cheesy.

Obviously Pun-Pun is the king of cheese, but if you bring level 9 spells to a game where spells cap out at level 3, you're probably going to get a DMG in the head. And deserve it. :smalltongue:

[Tyndmyr]

It's not very cheesy. You need, like, a handful of feats.

High cheese, to me, is the really TO stuff that no one can use in a game. Infinite loops, pun-pun hood and so on. Making a feat loop to get 9th level spells is comparably tame. (Depending on what you do with those spells).

Agreed. Don't get me wrong, feats to get 9th level spells IS cheesy...but it's not relying on highly out of context things, highly subjective things and really wierd interactions. Forcing your way to dietyhood would probably be cheesier. Hell, sticking a decanter of endless water in your mouth to drown-heal you might be cheesier. That's pretty clearly an exploit.

[gbprime]

Hell, sticking a decanter of endless water in your mouth to drown-heal you might be cheesier. That's pretty clearly an exploit.

That's my favorite "you know you're a munchkin when" example. :smallcool:

[Venger]

That's my favorite "you know you're a munchkin when" example. :smallcool:

hey man, sometimes your DMM persisted delay death is wearing off right after you kill a couple of gods and weathered their titanic blows taking you hundreds of points into the negatives. your cleric or hireling with wands of lesser vigour/CLW can't burn off the damage fast enough, the only thing to do is drown yourself. have someone cast deathwatch, yank the bottle out when you hit -1 and then zap you with the wand. you're good as new

[Coidzor]

Eh...IMHO, level of cheese is proportional to the absurdity of results attained; not the ease of acquisition. Using Feats to pick up 9th level spells at level 6 (11 levels early) is, therefore, pretty cheesy.

Obviously Pun-Pun is the king of cheese, but if you bring level 9 spells to a game where spells cap out at level 3, you're probably going to get a DMG in the head. And deserve it. :smalltongue:

I dunno, monks are pretty absurd, but I wouldn't call them cheesy. :smalltongue:

[Rubik]

Look in Ghostwalk.Ew ew ewwww! Get it off GET IT OFF GET IT OFF!!!!

[Coidzor]

Ew ew ewwww! Get it off GET IT OFF GET IT OFF!!!!

Huh. Now, I know I ain't afraid of no ghost and all, but I've never seen that kind of reaction to ghostwalk before. :smallconfused:

[Venger]

Huh. Now, I know I ain't afraid of no ghost and all, but I've never seen that kind of reaction to ghostwalk before. :smallconfused:

we're not all dan akroyd, we don't all enjoy cracking open a cold one, as it were

[Gullintanni]

I dunno, monks are pretty absurd, but I wouldn't call them cheesy. :smalltongue:

Nah...they're the one class for which WoTC decided to opt for realism. For example, in a fight between a Monk and a Lion, the results mirror, almost to a tee, the real life results of battles between unarmed Karate masters and Lions.

It's everything else that's absurd. :smalltongue:

[Tytalus]

Spell list (as was mentioned). 2 points of BAB aren't going to have a significant effect as a Duskblade will be using standard action Arcane Channeling.

That seems to be a bit of an overstatement. Attacking twice per round is a useful option for a full-round action.



Battle Sorcerer is the only way to get Arcane Strike in E6 without using early spell shenanigans. So a Kobold Sorcerer gets 3 attacks per round ...


That lats part only works as an argument if you assume "sorcerer = kobold", which I find questionable at best. Let's stick to comparing class features when comparing classes.

Arcane Strike seems like a poor choice for your spell slots in this case. After all, if you want to improve your weapon damage with spells, you might as well be a duskblade - they do that part better, at least. The big advantage of the sorcerer is that he can do more useful things with his spells.

[Tytalus]

Being behind a level for a while is a noticeable power hit. One the template is well worth, sure. Being a feat behind...much less so. Very few feats are worth a class level...and it being E6, you'll take those anyway.


I'm not sure I follow. The costs are the same for E6 and regular D&D.

Also, necropolitan is not available to PCs as a template ("LA: -"), so it must be aquired in-game. I.e., it's up to the DM to decide if it's an option for players.

The XP loss sets you back only half a level (assuming you plan a little), by the way (becoming even less over time).



It explicitly refers to advancing creatures via templates.


Creatures the PCs encounter, not PCs. Aquiring templates, as you described it, is not part of the E6 rules.



Note that several acquired templates are done so via transmission, disease style. So, if you're applying say, were-whatever to a monster, a player logically can end up with it.


Good point. However, again, this happens in-game and because the DM wants it to. It would make a good item for a "things to watch out for when playing E6" guide, though.



Look in Ghostwalk.


I'm afraid I can't find a level adjustment for the template (which is what we were discussing) there. Could you point me to it?

Technically, when talking about D&D ghosts, it's the MM1's version, as it's from a newer source than Ghostwalk's (although just barely). If you want to explicitly introduce Ghostwalk ghosts - which behave quite differently from MM1 ghosts and are (according to the book) not compatible, than that's obviously a conscious DM decision.

Note also that Ghostwalk ghosts are a lot less problematic compared to MM1 ghosts.



Half Dragon Human Sorc 2/Half Dragon Paragon 3/Sorc Prc1, as already demonstrated, will give you 4 BaB(well, 4.5 using fractional, if the PrC is half BaB) and full sorc 6 casting. This gives you a vastly better spell list than Duskblade, favorable stats, fun alternative options, a nice dose of natural armor, etc.

That's pretty cheese free, and quite justifiably superior.


The error regarding half-dragon paragon was already pointed out. It's a nice build, but with only 1st-level spells probably not "quite justifiably superior".

[Tyndmyr]

I'm not sure I follow. The costs are the same for E6 and regular D&D.

Also, necropolitan is not available to PCs as a template ("LA: -"), so it must be aquired in-game. I.e., it's up to the DM to decide if it's an option for players.

The XP loss sets you back only half a level (assuming you plan a little), by the way (becoming even less over time).

In either case, the optimal cost is 3k xp. Realistically, when you can get it will be expected to vary. However, in D&D, whenever you get it, you'll be a level behind and a bit more. The xp loss is NEVER half a level, unless it happens pregame and you write it into your backstory, which is no different between E6 and normal.

The difference is, being a level behind hurts. Even if it eventually catches up to half a level behind, you spend a notable portion of play time one level behind the party. This particular template is worth this cost, but large quantities of xp loss is not to be taken lightly.

In E6, you end up roughly a feat behind(half a feat behind, if you do it optimally). This is not the strongest feat, it's the weakest feat, because everyone can be assumed to grab the best available feats first. Half of toughness isn't worth very much.


Creatures the PCs encounter, not PCs. Aquiring templates, as you described it, is not part of the E6 rules.

Good point. However, again, this happens in-game and because the DM wants it to. It would make a good item for a "things to watch out for when playing E6" guide, though.

Vampirism is a particularly sticky wicket. In normal D&D...it's not that good of a template because of the level cost. In E6...slapping all that on a level 6 char is very, very good indeed. And vampires/werewolves are fantasy staples(especially vampires in D&D). You *could* remove them all from the world, but this gets rid of a great deal of fairly classic modules.

For lycanthropy, it's rather difficult to dispense with. You see, one player can take lycanthropy at first level by RAW. Werebear is an excellent choice. Oh look, now he can transmit it at will.


I'm afraid I can't find a level adjustment for the template (which is what we were discussing) there. Could you point me to it?

Technically, when talking about D&D ghosts, it's the MM1's version, as it's from a newer source than Ghostwalk's (although just barely). If you want to explicitly introduce Ghostwalk ghosts - which behave quite differently from MM1 ghosts and are (according to the book) not compatible, than that's obviously a conscious DM decision.

Note also that Ghostwalk ghosts are a lot less problematic compared to MM1 ghosts.

IIRC, it's LA 0. It's a wee bit overpowered in either vanilla D&D or E6, so yes, there's a certain element of cheddar in this particular choice...but it's at it's most broken at low levels, and as with most powerful templates, leveling up negates a lot of it's potency. So, at higher levels in D&D, it's not that big of a deal.

Note that this is far from the only problematic template. Dark is a solid template in normal D&D. In E6, it's frigging fantastic at only +1 LA.

Mineral Warrior rocks pretty hard at only LA 1. If you're using your physical stats(and let's be reasonable, who DOESN'T want +4 con?), those extra points mostly negate the cost of the template. (yes, Im aware it has minor penalties to all mental stats. This only hurts the MAD classes, which are mostly SOL in E6 anyway) DR 8/Adamantine is pretty good in E6.

Basically, flip through pretty much any templates of LA 3 or lower, and just calculate if they give you more benefit than the point buy costs. Many do.


The error regarding half-dragon paragon was already pointed out. It's a nice build, but with only 1st-level spells probably not "quite justifiably superior".

Probably not. I'd probably go Sorc 4/Half Dragon Paragon 2 then. 2nd level sorc spells gets you much, much better access to spells than full duskblade progression. This is ESPECIALLY true if your DM takes the conservative approach to Extra Spell, and rules you can only use it for things on your spell list(the other way is the one I prefer, but can be used to get some very amusing results in E6). Or hell, Wizard 2, Human Paragon 3, Mindbender 1. Third level spells, 3.5 BaB, free proficiency, bonus stats of choice, and no shortage of feats and skills.

Or, yknow, Artificer 6 would flat out crush it.

Duskblade, while not terrible, is most certainly not a very good gish in E6.

[dextercorvia]

That seems to be a bit of an overstatement. Attacking twice per round is a useful option for a full-round action.

To use that option is to neglect the duskblade's class features, however.



That lats part only works as an argument if you assume "sorcerer = kobold", which I find questionable at best. Let's stick to comparing class features when comparing classes.

Arcane Strike seems like a poor choice for your spell slots in this case. After all, if you want to improve your weapon damage with spells, you might as well be a duskblade - they do that part better, at least. The big advantage of the sorcerer is that he can do more useful things with his spells.

Natural attacks are very viable in E6, and a good work around to missing out on iteratives. Kobold is not the only way. Warforged, seveal feat options. It is not at all difficult to get 3-4 natural attacks at +2d4 or +3d4 in a round, rather than the duskblade's 1 attack at +5d6. Not to mention that a Battle Sorcerer can cast better spells, instead of just dropping them in an Arcane Strike nova.

Bard makes a great E6 gish, too. Duskblade isn't much different from a charger in E6.

[Tytalus]

In either case, the optimal cost is 3k xp. Realistically, when you can get it will be expected to vary. However, in D&D, whenever you get it, you'll be a level behind and a bit more. The xp loss is NEVER half a level, unless it happens pregame and you write it into your backstory, which is no different between E6 and normal.


The optimal cost is 2.5k XP, not 3k. You will be 1k more than half a level behind. At first.



The difference is, being a level behind hurts. Even if it eventually catches up to half a level behind, you spend a notable portion of play time one level behind the party. This particular template is worth this cost, but large quantities of xp loss is not to be taken lightly.


XP requirements don't scale linearly. With each new level the difference becomes more and more neglegible, and the difference to other players smaller.

If you also consider that "XP is a river (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19872242/Experience_is_a_River?no_redir=1)", you will realize that despite this initial investment you will end catching up to or overtaking your comrades eventually.



In E6, you end up roughly a feat behind(half a feat behind, if you do it optimally).


No matter how you do it, you aren't just a feat behind. In E6, you are behind on levels. And if you only have a max of six, that really hurts.

Of course, by level 6, you are no longer behind, but by then the meager XP expenditure is likely annulled anyway.



This is not the strongest feat, it's the weakest feat, because everyone can be assumed to grab the best available feats first. Half of toughness isn't worth very much.


Nobody picks toughness.



Vampirism is a particularly sticky wicket. In normal D&D...it's not that good of a template because of the level cost. In E6...slapping all that on a level 6 char is very, very good indeed. And vampires/werewolves are fantasy staples(especially vampires in D&D). You *could* remove them all from the world, but this gets rid of a great deal of fairly classic modules.

For lycanthropy, it's rather difficult to dispense with. You see, one player can take lycanthropy at first level by RAW. Werebear is an excellent choice. Oh look, now he can transmit it at will.


Not sure what your argument is. Vampirism is entirely DM-controlled. If he likes to have a character in the party that's 5 levels above everyone else, than he can do that. That's not an issue with E6, but with the DM. In regular D&D it's a bad idea as well; it's an advantage that's likely to unbalance the game up to the higher levels.

Lycanthropy... The E6 rules don't actually cover racial HD, so this would be up to the DM again. And how is this contrived example relavant to actual play again?



IIRC, it's LA 0.


There's no LA given in the template description.



Note that this is far from the only problematic template. Dark is a solid template in normal D&D. In E6, it's frigging fantastic at only +1 LA.

Mineral Warrior rocks pretty hard at only LA 1. If you're using your physical stats(and let's be reasonable, who DOESN'T want +4 con?), those extra points mostly negate the cost of the template. (yes, Im aware it has minor penalties to all mental stats. This only hurts the MAD classes, which are mostly SOL in E6 anyway) DR 8/Adamantine is pretty good in E6.


In regular D&D (with LA buyoff), those templates cost only 3k XP. What would you rather give up: a measly 3k XP (which you'll gain back entirely, since XP is a river) or 7 points worth of attributes, which you have no way of ever getting back?

In regular D&D, you'll pretty much gain the templates for free.



Probably not. I'd probably go Sorc 4/Half Dragon Paragon 2 then. 2nd level sorc spells gets you much, much better access to spells than full duskblade progression.


Sure, I've even pointed that out myself. You end up with 2nd-level spells, too, then. Lower BAB, lower HP, no casting in armor (with Battle Caster, duskblades can cast in heavy armor) , no channeling, fewer spells/day, a pitiful 3/1 spells known, disadvantage for overcoming SR, no useful weapon proficiencies, etc. It's a fun build, but hardly "quite justifiably superior".


Or hell, Wizard 2, Human Paragon 3, Mindbender 1. Third level spells, 3.5 BaB, free proficiency, bonus stats of choice, and no shortage of feats and skills.


YMMV, but that's not a gish, it's a caster.



Or, yknow, Artificer 6 would flat out crush it.


As it crushes everything in regular D&D. I fail to see your point. That artificers are problematic isn't new.



Duskblade, while not terrible, is most certainly not a very good gish in E6.

I respect your opinion, but that doesn't seem to follow from the evidence you presented.

Duskblade is a solid gish-in-a-can. It has a narrow focus, but it's good at what it does.

[Tyndmyr]

The optimal cost is 2.5k XP, not 3k. You will be 1k more than half a level behind. At first.

There is no level that costs 1500 xp. That's not possible. Necropolitan costs you 1 level, THEN another 1000 xp.

You will be 1k more than a full level behind. That's what it does.


XP requirements don't scale linearly. With each new level the difference becomes more and more neglegible, and the difference to other players smaller.

Yes. However, note that there are only two states. State A. You are the same level. No disadvantage, but also, no catching up. State B. Behind. Catching up at roughly a 10% xp gain rate(details vary somewhat), but you're behind.

It actually takes a fairly decent amount of time to get to the point where you're not leveling up behind the party.


If you also consider that "XP is a river (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19872242/Experience_is_a_River?no_redir=1)", you will realize that despite this initial investment you will end catching up to or overtaking your comrades eventually.

Er. I have two necropolitans in my current party. The party level is ten, so the first one swapped over more than half his career ago. He's still notably behind on xp, though yes, much of the deficit has been recovered.


No matter how you do it, you aren't just a feat behind. In E6, you are behind on levels. And if you only have a max of six, that really hurts.

No, you're not. There's no LA. You are only at the same deficit that you would be in normal D&D until you hit six. The cap is the cap.


Of course, by level 6, you are no longer behind, but by then the meager XP expenditure is likely annulled anyway.

No. It's not. Run the math.


Nobody picks toughness.

Yes, they do. It's not a powerful feat, but it's a core feat so it's always available, and always minimally helpful for any archtype. Most classes lack access to the giants/etc toughness, and so after improved toughness, the options for more hp from feats are...limited.


Not sure what your argument is. Vampirism is entirely DM-controlled. If he likes to have a character in the party that's 5 levels above everyone else, than he can do that. That's not an issue with E6, but with the DM. In regular D&D it's a bad idea as well; it's an advantage that's likely to unbalance the game up to the higher levels.

Not really. Players rarely start out as vampires without using the progression at level 1. No imbalance at all. If anything, vampires are a bit weak in vanilla D&D. It's only the E6 rules that create a problem.

And yes, he can solve this by wild bannings. If he's aware of it ahead of time, which he probably isn't. And he's ok with not utilizing some classic fantasy staples.


Lycanthropy... The E6 rules don't actually cover racial HD, so this would be up to the DM again. And how is this contrived example relavant to actual play again?

Racial HD work exactly as normally, presumably. The werebear player rolls up a werebear. Regularly, using savage species...whatever. Now, during play, he realizes that his bite passes it along, and being a werebear isn't a bad deal. He tries to convince his buddies to join him in werebearness(or, more amusingly, attempts to convert people to lawful goodness with the temptation of power).

I have actually had this occur, albeit in normal play. There's no reason it cannot also happen in E6...except that it suddenly breaks the game, though it doesn't in normal D&D.


There's no LA given in the template description.

Away from book atm. Take a look at this list (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19869266/Master_Template_List) of some templates. Tell me which ones are not broken, and still worth taking.


In regular D&D (with LA buyoff), those templates cost only 3k XP. What would you rather give up: a measly 3k XP (which you'll gain back entirely, since XP is a river) or 7 points worth of attributes, which you have no way of ever getting back?

LA buyoff is a variant rule. You can't assume it'll be in play. Also, that's only true for LA 1 templates.


In regular D&D, you'll pretty much gain the templates for free.

No. In REGULAR D&D, taking templates with LA means you permanently have less class levels and HD. It's a pretty notable cost.


Sure, I've even pointed that out myself. You end up with 2nd-level spells, too, then. Lower BAB, lower HP, no casting in armor (with Battle Caster, duskblades can cast in heavy armor) , no channeling, fewer spells/day, a pitiful 3/1 spells known, disadvantage for overcoming SR, no useful weapon proficiencies, etc. It's a fun build, but hardly "quite justifiably superior".

Armor is mostly irrelevant. There are other ways to cast in armor, including ways accessible by feats. Plus, you've got a giant pile of natural armor for free. So, you're already on par with the duskblade here, and have more total potential for improvement.

Hit points? You realize half dragon paragon gets D12s, right? Assuming you start with HD paragon as first level(and since it has more skills, why wouldn't you?), you actually end up slightly ahead of the duskblade.

You would not be at a disadvantage for overcoming SR, as you still have full CL.

You have giant piles of strength. Strength trumps BaB except for iteratives...but you can't use iteratives most of the time as a duskblade anyhow. If all you wanted to do was fullattack, why would you care about playing a gish?

You have multiple natural weapons. So, yeah, there goes the iterative logic. Two primary attacks and a secondary. We're killing the duskblade on total attacks.

Expanding your spell list via feats is extremely slow. Have fun doing so on a 1 for 1 basis if, and only if, your DM rules that Extra Spell can be used on things outside your list. Otherwise, you cannot do so at all.


YMMV, but that's not a gish, it's a caster.

It's a caster that, if built appropriately, makes a fine melee fighter. He's got proficiency, he's got extra feats to feed melee proficiency, he's got a lovely spectrum of skills(basically anything he wants), and he's almost caught up to you in hp. Yes, he absolutely crushes you in terms of arcane power(the prc isn't important, you could use any prc that progresses casting), but there's absolutely no reason you can't have a 20 strength this way(I've played this char too. It works).


I respect your opinion, but that doesn't seem to follow from the evidence you presented.

Duskblade is a solid gish-in-a-can. It has a narrow focus, but it's good at what it does.

It is a gish in a can. It is playable at is, mostly at medium op. It is mostly certainly not especially notable or optimal of a choice as a gish, either in regular D&D or in E6.

[Curmudgeon]

How hard is it to do this (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=D%26D+E6)?
Actually, pretty annoyingly hard. I keep my browser locked down tightly, and any site that requires JavaScript is a pain in the butt to use because it requires custom security overrides. How hard is it for you to do the search directly instead of pointing to some tweaky animated tool?

[dextercorvia]

There is not much difference between Gish and Caster with the right buffs in E6. Check out Koury's old Wizard5 vs Fighter6 melee battles. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=170689)

[Rubik]

Huh. Now, I know I ain't afraid of no ghost and all, but I've never seen that kind of reaction to ghostwalk before. :smallconfused:Ghostwalk ghosts suck compared to the regular one (template or savage progression).

Not a big fan.

[Coidzor]

That seems to be a bit of an overstatement. Attacking twice per round is a useful option for a full-round action.

Indeed, IIRC, the duskblade handbook even mentions that full attacks are going to be replacing arcane channelling for a significant period of levels when they're an option, so if the enemy is within reach+5', then full attack, otherwise move and channel.

And since you never get full attack channeling as a duskblade in E6, the TWF variant is right out, probably have to go with the poison or tripping flavors of duskblade...


Arcane Strike seems like a poor choice for your spell slots in this case. After all, if you want to improve your weapon damage with spells, you might as well be a duskblade - they do that part better, at least. The big advantage of the sorcerer is that he can do more useful things with his spells.

Arcane strike has the advantage of being shared throughout one's natural weapons, so, say, a sorcerer gish who gets some natural weapons from his race or feats will be able to have that extra damage on all of its attacks as opposed to the duskblade who would only be able to do it through a single manufactured or natural weapon. So there is that case where something like kobold is advantageous or taking some incarnum/willing deformity/aberration-blooded/fiendish heritage feats that grant extra attacks or acquire a horned helm for 6K for the gore attack and grab some gloves or non-incarnum feats for some claws or a bite will maximize the bang for the buck of expending spells for damage.

[dextercorvia]

Indeed, IIRC, the duskblade handbook even mentions that full attacks are going to be replacing arcane channelling for a significant period of levels when they're an option, so if the enemy is within reach+5', then full attack, otherwise move and channel.

As I recall, that range is really only levels 11-12.

[Rubik]

Ghostwalk ghosts suck compared to the regular one (template or savage progression).

Not a big fan.Oh, and you can't take levels in actual character classes. I almost forgot.

Ghostwalk ghosts are seriously sucky.

[Tytalus]

To use that option is to neglect the duskblade's class features, however.


It's a single class feature.

And you are doing it to use another feature of the class (full BAB).



Bard makes a great E6 gish, too. Duskblade isn't much different from a charger in E6.

Yes, bards are solid, too. Duskblades are like chargers? Hmm, YMMV, of course, but I don't see that at all.

[Tytalus]

There is no level that costs 1500 xp. That's not possible. Necropolitan costs you 1 level, THEN another 1000 xp.

You will be 1k more than a full level behind. That's what it does.


No, it isn't.

Necropolitan RAW: "Immediately upon opening its undead eyes, a new necropolitan loses a level as if the spell raise dead had been used on it".

That means that you loose half a level if you time your ritual right, as shown in the PHB (p.171): "The character’s new XP total is midway between the minimum needed for his or her new (reduced) level and the minimum needed for the next one."

So, ideal case: you just hit level 4 (6,000 XP), loose a level "as if the spell raise dead had been used" --> 4,500 XP, then another 1,000 XP --> 3,500 XP. Net result: 2,500 XP lost.



Er. I have two necropolitans in my current party. The party level is ten, so the first one swapped over more than half his career ago. He's still notably behind on xp, though yes, much of the deficit has been recovered.


It seems like he lost too many XP in the first place, so that's probably part of the problem. It also sounds like XP may not be claculated properly (i.e., lower-level chars getting more), but that's just a guess.

If he switched at level 5, he lost (or should have lost 3,000 XP). At level ten - even if he did not get better XP when he should have - that's only 30% of the XP he needs for the next level. Given the typical 13 encounters before leveling, he has less than 4 encounters where he's a level behind (although he does have the benefits of being a necropolitan to make up for it) than the others. At level 15 - again assuming he doesn't get the extra XP he ought to - it's less than 3, at 20, less than 2.



No, you're not. There's no LA. You are only at the same deficit that you would be in normal D&D until you hit six. The cap is the cap.


I don't follow. When you do the ritual in E6, you loose XP just as in regular D&D. Ergo, you are behind when it comes to advancing. The difference in play is larger the lower the level (see above), so if your game only spans lower levels, you feel it more. Of course, once you hit the cap, it's a different story.



No. It's not. Run the math.


Others have done similar calculations, I'm sure you can derive the math from there. See the "XP is a river link".

As an approximation, it's pretty simple: assume you are behind for 3/13 encounters per level (see above), then simply multiply the extra experience gained row shown in the article by 3/13, and you'll see that you'll bridge the gap quite quickly. Especially for such small amounts as 2,500 XP.



Yes, they do.


Then we'll have to agree to disagree.

Your original point, though, that you are only half a feat behind, is still not correct: you are behind on leveling until you hit your level cap.



Not really. Players rarely start out as vampires without using the progression at level 1. No imbalance at all. If anything, vampires are a bit weak in vanilla D&D. It's only the E6 rules that create a problem.

And yes, he can solve this by wild bannings. If he's aware of it ahead of time, which he probably isn't. And he's ok with not utilizing some classic fantasy staples.


A vampire can't infect a PC until he's level 5+ in core (see MM p. 252), so level 1 is no issue. Thus, it stands to reason that you can't aquire the template with less than 5 HD.

The savage progesssion (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sp/20030824a) is explicitly subject to DM-approval, and would have minimal effect on the game anyway, as you can gain at most 1 level - unless you choose to ignore the rules for creating vampires through the Create Spawn ability (i.e., that it only works on creatures with 5+ HD). If you decide to do that, then you are probably aware of the consequences.

I fail to see how the E6 rules create a problem here, as you claim.



Racial HD work exactly as normally, presumably. The werebear player rolls up a werebear. Regularly, using savage species...whatever. Now, during play, he realizes that his bite passes it along, and being a werebear isn't a bad deal. He tries to convince his buddies to join him in werebearness(or, more amusingly, attempts to convert people to lawful goodness with the temptation of power).

I have actually had this occur, albeit in normal play. There's no reason it cannot also happen in E6...except that it suddenly breaks the game, though it doesn't in normal D&D.


You can't be a werebear in E6 (min. 1+6=7 levels). Let's assume a werewolf instead, for agrument's sake. Let's further assume the game doesn't start at level 1 (apparently a common starting point in E6 games) and the DM actually OKs a PC to be a lycanthrope.

So, what happens? Everybody gets 2 extra HD, some abilities, some drastic drawbacks, etc.

That's fantastic. Now you have a themed party, with unique - but shared - strengths and drawbacks! How does it break E6? Not at all. You simply adjust the campaign, as you would have to for regular D&D as well. Tougher oponents, plot hooks related to the party's lycanthropy. Sounds pretty cool, actually. I'd play that.



Away from book atm. Take a look at this list (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19869266/Master_Template_List) of some templates. Tell me which ones are not broken, and still worth taking.


What? No thanks, do your own work.

But back to the original point: ghost doesn't seem to be an issue for E6, if it's even a legal option.



LA buyoff is a variant rule. You can't assume it'll be in play. Also, that's only true for LA 1 templates.


Since virtually everything you've mentioned as problems of E6 involves variant rules (including obscure ones, like Ghostwalk ghosts), I assumed that was a given.

Buyoff works for larger LAs, too, by the way. Using templates, by and large, is a variant rule. Especially if they aren't core.

Now, certainly there are issues with templates, but those aren't new or specific to E6. E6's unique LA rules shift the usefulness of some templates somewhat, giving the benefits earlier with long-term sacrifices in ability ponits. The biggest offender in E6 is probably the pixie, since it offers abilities that are difficult to deal with in an E6 world (combination of improved invisibility, flight, DR, SR) without breaking immersion / resorting to metagame, especially at ELC 1.

If you were to say that templates and LA races can be problematic (both in D&D and E6) and that one should be especially careful allowing one in E6, I would agree.



No. In REGULAR D&D, taking templates with LA means you permanently have less class levels and HD. It's a pretty notable cost.


No, particularly not for LA +1 templates. See the "XP is a river thread" and you can see that the 3k XP are certainly a non-issue over time.

If LA buoff is not an option, then yes, you are behind. So templates are less woth it, but things like Mineral Warrior can still wreck game balance in low-level play. As an aside: it's hard to discuss "regular" D&D when most of the examples you bring are not from core, i.e. optional rules, some of which even campaign-specific. If we can assume that Mineral Warrior and Dark Creatures are available, we can probably assume LA buyoff is available as well. Not that it changes the point much.



Armor is mostly irrelevant. There are other ways to cast in armor, including ways accessible by feats. Plus, you've got a giant pile of natural armor for free. So, you're already on par with the duskblade here, and have more total potential for improvement.


Your "giant pile of natural armor" is not a result of your class selection, but your race. All you get from class levels is a meager +1.

Let's assume the duskblade is also a half-dragon, so we don't dilute the actual discussion of the classes.

And: can you please enlighten me how you can cast in heavy armor using just feats? That is new to me.



Hit points? You realize half dragon paragon gets D12s, right? Assuming you start with HD paragon as first level(and since it has more skills, why wouldn't you?), you actually end up slightly ahead of the duskblade.


I wish you had actually done the math, instead of just guessing. Anyway, here it is:

Duskblade 6: 8 + 5x4.5 = 30.5 HP
Sorc4/HDP2 (your original build): 4 + 3x2.5 + 2x6.5 = 24.5 HP
HDP1/Sorc4/HDP1 (revised build): 12 + 4x2.5 +6.5 = 28.5 HP

Either way, the duskblade wins. In a game where, according to your claim, Toghness is a viable choice, the duskblade comes out 2 feats / 2/3rds of a feat ahead.

BTW, I was going by your build, which implies that you stat with sorcerer. Hey, it's your build, not mine.



You would not be at a disadvantage for overcoming SR, as you still have full CL.


Duskblades get a +2 to overcome SR, on top of their full caster level.



You have giant piles of strength. Strength trumps BaB except for iteratives...


Another argument based on race, not class build.



Expanding your spell list via feats is extremely slow. Have fun doing so on a 1 for 1 basis if, and only if, your DM rules that Extra Spell can be used on things outside your list. Otherwise, you cannot do so at all.


The small spell list has been mentioned multiple times now, I think it's a well-known fact by now.

That is one of the tradeoffs: huge spell list and pathetic number of spells known or small spell list and decent number of spells known.

There are other tradeoffs, If it's worth it in the end is what we are dicussing.

If you take the racial benefits out of the equasion, the only real selling point of your guy is the large spell list. Given all the other stuff the diskblade is better at, such BAB (note: not offset by strength since both PC could be half-dragons), spells known, saves, class features, HP, proficiencies (armor, weapons, shields), ability to cast in armor, etc. - I have to revise my earlier estimation; the duskblade is clearly stronger (melee/gishing). YMMV, obviously.



It's a caster that, if built appropriately, makes a fine melee fighter. He's got proficiency, he's got extra feats to feed melee proficiency, he's got a lovely spectrum of skills(basically anything he wants), and he's almost caught up to you in hp. Yes, he absolutely crushes you in terms of arcane power(the prc isn't important, you could use any prc that progresses casting), but there's absolutely no reason you can't have a 20 strength this way(I've played this char too. It works).


I guess I'm still stuck with the gish definitions from the old WotC boards, which emphasized both caster progression and BAB. But fine, let's take a look at this "gish".

That he's a great caster is clear.

So: what makes him a fine melee character? How does he overcome the disadvanteges compared to the duskblade when it comes to melee? How can you get the following for the average four encounters spaced out over a day of adventuring (please leave out racial modifiers for claricty):


Comparable armor/shield AC (bridging the gap) to medium armor (heavy with a single feat), shield
Comparable HP (your build only has 24.5): 30.5 before CON
Comaprable spell penetration (you have +5): +8 bonus
Comparable damage potential (arcane strike with a single attack and few spells/day?): arcane channeling or full attack
Comparable chance to cast in melee: free combat casting feat
Comparable saves: 6/2/6
Comparable attack bonus: +6 before STR
Comparable non-magical attack option (i.e., option after being hit with a successful, targeted Dispel Magic): full BAB (2 attacks/round), medium/heavy armor + shield, good HP, etc.


Of course, your build has its perks, that can help to compensate some weaknesses compared to the duskblade. Mainly, those are:


Better skill points (likely +12, assuming same INT)
Better skill list (arguably, but definately with Able Learner - costs a feat though)
Ability bonus +2 @ ECL6
Free bonus feat (as opposed to determined bonus feat for duskblade)
Potentially useful ability from PrC level (telepathy)
Larger spell list (but needs spells to become effective in combat, and fewer spells/day)


Larger spell list aside, those are all nice abilities, but they hardly help filling the gish role (although feat and ability boost are decent).

Lastly, there is the issue of utility. At first glance, your approach offers much more of that given its larger spell list. However, again the low number of spells per day, plus the necessity to use them to become relevant in combat is an issue. With only (3/2/1) spells/day before INT and ~4 encounters/day, that doesn't leave much for utility. You could be useful to the party by maxing one or two utility skills. The duskblade is still a decent fighter, even after having blown his (larger) number of spells/day. And he doesn't have to use them to chatch up for low BAB, AC, etc.



It is a gish in a can. It is playable at is, mostly at medium op. It is mostly certainly not especially notable or optimal of a choice as a gish, either in regular D&D or in E6.

I totally agree that it's mostly medium OP, and that there are more powerful options out there (I don't think the ones presented qualify, though). However, since we were discussing if duskblade is a solid option for E6, that's all that's relevant, IMHO. Most actual games appear to be on the low-medium side of the spectrum. For those, you can't go wrong with a duskblade for a gish.

[dextercorvia]

Duskblades are like chargers? Hmm, YMMV, of course, but I don't see that at all.

What I mean, is that a Duskblade6's main schtick is whacking stuff with a weapon. Sure he infuses his weapon with his own magic to make it whack harder*, but that isn't significantly different than a charger running up to a target in order to whack it harder.

A true Gish should have out of combat magical utility that a Duskblade just doesn't have the spell list or spells known for.

You call it Gish in a can, I prefer to think of it as Gish-lite. I would likely feel just as gishy playing an Incarnate or Totemist.