High-Op, the early years

[limejuicepowder]

Making a build that can destroy the universe at (or close to) level 20 is all well and good, but how viable are some of the iconic GitP builds prior to that? Let's say I wanted to play The Mailman but the game started at level 5 and was probably going to end around level 10-12.

How good would he be? Feel free to answer this for any of the named TO builds.

[Answerer]

Most high-op stuff isn't from GitP. The Mailman, for one, certainly isn't.

Most of 3.5 optimization is from 339/BrilliantGameologists/Minmaxboards or from Wizards' Char-Op board. GitP is just the most active 3.5 board now, since the system is kind of dead. Paizo's disgusted a lot of optimizers, so I don't think there's a lot of Pathfinder optimization going on. At least not on the bordering-on-theoretical level that the Mailman's at.

[BowStreetRunner]

I've often wondered this myself, as many of the builds are unbelievably weak until they reach some level where the synergy of various abilities finally comes together and makes them overpowered. It would be a fun exercise at a game con or something to run a 20 level dungeon-delve challenge where each player had to take their character through a series of 20 levels of encounters and was scored on how well they survived each level.

[Answerer]

I've often wondered this myself, as many of the builds are unbelievably weak until they reach some level where the synergy of various abilities finally comes together and makes them overpowered.
For a caster, at least, that's not really true. There's no reason a Wizard can't just cast "normal Wizard" spells until the synergy comes online. Even if his feats and class features do nothing, his spells are more than good enough to be very powerful.

[Ezekiul]

If you want some builds, I try and design most of my characters to come "online" at level 9. If you want to play the mailman I'm pretty sure you can google it and see the progression and gameplay at X levels, but if you give us a theme, background, or idea for a character we can gladly help you try to optimize at those levels.

[docnessuno]

A mailman (talking about the concept and not the specific build) works quite well also in the mid levels, obviously it doesn't have the sheer power of the full-bloomed level 20s, but can still reach damage outputs able to 1-shot many CR-appropriate encounters.

[eggs]

Beside builds that rely heavily on capstones, like Walker in the Waste or Rainbow Warsnake setups, lower levels aren't usually much of a problem.

At worst, you can usually replace the prerequisite feats or spells with more useful filler that you can always retrain when the prerequisite matters.

[Pandiano]

Beside builds that rely heavily on capstones, like Walker in the Waste or Rainbow Warsnake setups, lower levels aren't usually much of a problem.

At worst, you can usually replace the prerequisite feats or spells with more useful filler that you can always retrain when the prerequisite matters.

"You can always retrain"? Where did you get that from? Last I checked those things are a DM call. And if your DM is lax enough to let you have your way, you need not to worry of faring poorly.

[Hirax]

For a caster, at least, that's not really true. There's no reason a Wizard can't just cast "normal Wizard" spells until the synergy comes online. Even if his feats and class features do nothing, his spells are more than good enough to be very powerful.

Pretty much this, especially if the build doesn't lose caster levels anywhere along the way.

[eggs]

"You can always retrain"? Where did you get that from? Last I checked those things are a DM call. And if your DM is lax enough to let you have your way, you need not to worry of faring poorly.
I get it from the PHB2 p. 192-195. It isn't any more of a DM call than any other part of the system.

[A_S]

Well, Flaming Homer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4108954&postcount=22) comes online a little bit at a time between levels 8 and 15 or so.

An awful lot of heavily optimized builds focus on tier 1-2 casting classes, which has already been covered in terms of the "you're still a level 1 wizard, which is good" factor. Pretty much the same goes for a lot of builds that come off of any other kind of strong chassis (like Bardsaders and anything build out of Duskblade...ToB and other T3 classes kick ass at low levels, and then the optimization tricks come online in time to keep them from falling off later on).

One obvious class of characters who suck at early levels is non-Duskblade gishes. Sorcadin is great once it turns into a real gish, but Sorc 4 / Pal 2 is a pretty bad level 6 build.

[Hirax]

One obvious class of characters who suck at early levels is non-Duskblade gishes. Sorcadin is great once it turns into a real gish, but Sorc 4 / Pal 2 is a pretty bad level 6 build.

Lots of wizard based gishes would disagree. The classic wizard6/swiftblade9/ad champ5 is good all throughout, for instance.

[A_S]

Lots of wizard based gishes would disagree. The classic wizard6/swiftblade9/ad champ5 is good all throughout, for instance.
True. I guess I was thinking of ones that don't front-load their caster levels.

[Draz74]

Lots of wizard based gishes would disagree. The classic wizard6/swiftblade9/ad champ5 is good all throughout, for instance.

Well, it's not good at being a Gish early on. But yes, it's still playable and powerful.

Whereas Suel Arcanamach gishes (e.g. Duskblade 3 / Paladin 2 / Warblade 1 / Suel Arcanamach 4 / Spellsword 1 / Abjurant Champion 5 / Dragon Disciple 4) are the other way around. At low levels, they're pretty sad casters, but perfectly competent melee warriors. Then eventually they become decent gishes.

I think the most-recognized build names that actually originated at GitP are probably Cindy (who's basically just a Wizard version of the Mailman), Flaming Homer (covered above), and Haberdash the Masked. The latter, like Homer, is ... more a mid-level build than a high-level build. In fact, at higher levels, he stops being "a build" and becomes a whole family of builds, since the thread originally describing him gives a bunch of guidelines rather than specifics after nine levels. (Factotum 8 / Master of Masks 1 is pretty much required, but after that ... more Factotum? Chameleon? Incarnate?)

And at low levels, he's basically a Factotum with a couple unusual skill choices ... so definitely fairly playable.

EDIT: Incidentally, at Level 1, I think the most powerful build anyone's come up with (barring Pun-Pun) is the Wizard who sells her spellbook and buys a bunch of Riding Dogs and Mules with the cash.

[Eldariel]

Well, it's not good at being a Gish early on. But yes, it's still playable and powerful.

Whereas Suel Arcanamach gishes (e.g. Duskblade 3 / Paladin 2 / Warblade 1 / Suel Arcanamach 4 / Spellsword 1 / Abjurant Champion 5 / Dragon Disciple 4) are the other way around. At low levels, they're pretty sad casters, but perfectly competent melee warriors. Then eventually they become decent gishes.

I think the most-recognized build names that actually originated at GitP are probably Cindy (who's basically just a Wizard version of the Mailman), Flaming Homer (covered above), and Haberdash the Masked. The latter, like Homer, is ... more a mid-level build than a high-level build. In fact, at higher levels, he stops being "a build" and becomes a whole family of builds, since the thread originally describing him gives a bunch of guidelines rather than specifics after nine levels. (Factotum 8 / Master of Masks 1 is pretty much required, but after that ... more Factotum? Chameleon? Incarnate?)

And at low levels, he's basically a Factotum with a couple unusual skill choices ... so definitely fairly playable.

EDIT: Incidentally, at Level 1, I think the most powerful build anyone's come up with (barring Pun-Pun) is the Wizard who sells her spellbook and buys a bunch of Riding Dogs and Mules with the cash.

Additionally, most of the stuff from GitP isn't really highly optimized; Cindy is probably the most optimized of that bunch and it's really just a run-of-the-mill Incantatrix with DCFS and solid spell choices. Compared to the realm of TO, it's all fairly mild.

And level 1 of course has some fairly amazing tricks you can pull off but really, the easiest is just getting that Wish from Pazuzu to "corrupt" you and do some stupid stuff with it (since Wishes are kinda strong). There are others but the relatively low wealth really limits things (since on l1, money tends to be much stronger than most class features).

[TheFallenOne]

EDIT: Incidentally, at Level 1, I think the most powerful build anyone's come up with (barring Pun-Pun) is the Wizard who sells her spellbook and buys a bunch of Riding Dogs and Mules with the cash.

At level 1 you can have a Focused Specialist Conjurer with CL 5 Kelgore's Firebolts, and some metamagic on top(Sudden for a one/day nuke or Metamagic School Focus to have 3 +1s, like Fiery).

But my favorite is an Azurin Crusader with Reflexive Psychosis and Shape Soulmeld(Bloodtalons). Keeps standing with negative hit points. DR 5/- lets you wade through most things you face at that point with little trouble, including some dogs and mules(plus you ride one yourself. With the Magebred template ideally). Martial Spirit and Crusader's Strike for limitless on-hit healing. Level 2 you pick up Incarnate and Therapeutic Mantle. At that point you'll have little trouble outlasting most enemies. You won't take them down in one go like a Mailman, but you can beat up equal CR enemies all day long without stopping for breath once.

[Venusaur]

If you want to win at low levels, bust out SoTAO Shooting Star Mystic Ranger. At low levels, it is basically Lightning Warrior.

[sreservoir]

If you want to win at low levels, bust out SoTAO Shooting Star Mystic Ranger. At low levels, it is basically Lightning Warrior.

but it doesn't even have a familiar!

[Phelix-Mu]

I do like the character optimization talk as much as the next person. Good tricks are good. But I often find that early levels in a game are really more based on the following:

1.) How bad does the DM want to kill you? It's always easiest for the DM to get his/her way early on.

2.) How helpful are your friends? Encounter ratings usually assume that you aren't soloing (which is often downright suicidal at starting levels), and if there is good party synergy, survival chances go up dramatically. On the other hand, if the half-orc brb tank and the elf wizard refuse to help each other over role playing, or if that first level rogue just has no idea how to use his/her abilities, then even a well-optimized low-level may face an untimely end.

3.) Bad luck. Just no stopping it at low levels. A friend of mine has lost no less than two characters to guards/ambushers with fairly low CRs with crossbows and double 20s. Neither of his characters were unusually lame, either, just unlucky.

So, at low levels you work really with what is most practical at the time.

Retraining comes in later, but speaking of which, as a DM I usually try to put at least to put some more role-playing barriers into the whole retrain/rebuild process. For instance, at high-levels, the costs associated with the process are pathetically low. I like continuity and want players to stick with characters, but I don't want players that want a wizard instead playing a fighter until they are high enough to rebuild into a wiz that can use fireball. Making it too accessible to players throws a state of flux into the campaign that makes planning long-term challenges much more difficult.

[Darth Stabber]

Most flavors of ubercharger are fine to play 1-20, but their are definitely points where you make big leaps in power. Lvl6 in particular is a huge jump (shock trooper + first iterative), especially since leap attack was available the level before. Spirit lion Barb4/fighter1/X1 you have the basic combo going, before that you are just a hard charging normal non-tripper fighter, which isn't so bad at level 5, and once you hit 6, you are going to have damage output in the stratosphere for the rest of the game. Then you can either go the frenzied breserker manufactured weapons route, or you follow the bear warrior natural weapons and IUS route, or some other permutation.

About half of the things that involve ur-priest have definite dips in playability (due to starting spell progression over again), but they are usually weatherable, as ur-priest catches up pretty quick.

King of smack has some awkward points, not bad, just awkward.

King of pong's awkward points are a little more bad (still not too bad).

[Venger]

If you want to win at low levels, bust out SoTAO Shooting Star Mystic Ranger. At low levels, it is basically Lightning Warrior.

well, only the most serious roleplayers would do that

since it goes so out of its way to sacrifice power for flavor

[weckar]

Corruption mages can really come online as early as level 4. Their power will only be exponential from there. Of course, it requires some creative rule reading...

[Darth Stabber]

If you want high-op that works at every level might I suggest druid20? Let's face it, other than planar time trait abuse via planar shepard, there isn't really anything you could add to it to make it better than it already is. That means a big chunk of opti-fu has already been done for you, meaning you only have to worry about race, feats, and skills. Everything else can be picked somewhat on the fly (spells, animal forms, animal companion), and experimented with as you go. Don't like how a spell works, prep a different one. Animal companion not working, let him go and get a different one. Don't like being a giant turtle, don't use that shape anymore.

As an added bonus you can hide your true opti-fu until it's needed, play the basic stuff for most if the game then just prepare the awesome stuff, turn into the awesome thing, ect and let everyone revel in your bad@ssery. Crouching tiger, hidden draconic wildshape.

[Answerer]

Well, Wild Shape does wait until level 5. It's not like the Druid is bad without it, but if Wild Shape's a big part of the draw for you, that could be sad.

[Phelix-Mu]

Right, I agree about druid. Somebody in development clearly had some kind of crush on the class concept, and ironically, it seemed like 3.0>3.5 was no nerf even when early days of third should have shown "wait, this seems unfair to other classes."

That said, I am a druid obsessive, confirmed, down-and-dirty addict. The whole concept, the mechanics, the spell list, the flavor. It suits me to a tee.

Just finished a running a campaign where a shifter ranger/scout in the party took Leadership and got a shifter druid as a cohort. She was outclassing his character by level 18 (considering she was 15th). She took Moonspeaker PrC and went summoner route. It's a bizarrely, deliciously strong PrC, with an extra helping of cool flavor for the shifters.

Anyway, at least it isn't as aberrant as the druidic version of the 3.0 PrC, Scion, IIRC. Made one a couple campaigns back, eventually had to assign a +2 level adjustment cause the tweaks I made to the PrC were way less balanced than anticipated.

[Darth Stabber]

Just finished a running a campaign where a shifter ranger/scout in the party took Leadership and got a shifter druid as a cohort. She was outclassing his character by level 18 (considering she was 15th). She took Moonspeaker PrC and went summoner route. It's a bizarrely, deliciously strong PrC, with an extra helping of cool flavor for the shifters.

Mr. William's hatred for sorcerers was balanced out by someone's love for hippies or bears. But yeah, druids can hog spotlight if you let them, but the key difficulty in playing them is similar to the key difficulty in playing high level wizards, not overshadowing the party. Wizards have exellent guidance from TLN, where as there is not guide to "being Poison Ivy". But giving the NPC moonspeaker was an excellent stealth nerf. Moonspeakers abilities are surely great, but they have a hard time comparing to straight druid. Other classes have to go to prcs and other extraneous efforts just to get where druid gets following nature's simple path.

Now I feel compelled to write "Darth Stabber's guide to being Poison Ivy", but there are three problems. 1) the name "poison ivy" is merely a convention based on the use of batman character names (robin sorcs, bane barbarians, joker bards), while my actual thoughts have nothing to do with that particular villianess. 2) I really don't feel qualified to write said guide. And 3) I haven't even finished my gestalt guide yet.

[kme]

Lots of wizard based gishes would disagree. The classic wizard6/swiftblade9/ad champ5 is good all throughout, for instance.
That is actually a perfect example of a build that is very unsatisfying to play in practice.

You want to be a gish but instead you start and remain as a somewhat gimped wizard (gish feats/gear/spells, lower int etc.) for most of your career. Finally, after so many levels you become solid enough in melee that you can start actually gishing and then, you realize that it's not really as effective as simply playing like a gimped wizard you were from the start.

[Hirax]

That is actually a perfect example of a build that is very unsatisfying to play in practice.

You want to be a gish but instead you start and remain as a somewhat gimped wizard (gish feats/gear/spells, lower int etc.) for most of your career. Finally, after so many levels you become solid enough in melee that you can start actually gishing and then, you realize that it's not really as effective as simply playing like a gimped wizard you were from the start.

That's not true at all. You're doing something wrong.

[Psyren]

Most high-op stuff isn't from GitP. The Mailman, for one, certainly isn't.

Most of 3.5 optimization is from 339/BrilliantGameologists/Minmaxboards or from Wizards' Char-Op board. GitP is just the most active 3.5 board now, since the system is kind of dead. Paizo's disgusted a lot of optimizers, so I don't think there's a lot of Pathfinder optimization going on. At least not on the bordering-on-theoretical level that the Mailman's at.

Anger at Paizo, if that's even as widespread as some here would like to believe, is hardly the only reason for less TO in PF. For all that they kept the general inequality of linear warriors/quadratic wizards in the game, Paizo did still close quite a few of the worst loopholes and exploits 3.5 had to offer (e.g. beating polymorph and it's ilk silly with the nerfbat), while simultaneously just not porting in others (like Ice Assassin, Invisible Spell etc.)

[odigity]

Lots of wizard based gishes would disagree. The classic wizard6/swiftblade9/ad champ5 is good all throughout, for instance.


That is actually a perfect example of a build that is very unsatisfying to play in practice.

You want to be a gish but instead you start and remain as a somewhat gimped wizard (gish feats/gear/spells, lower int etc.) for most of your career. Finally, after so many levels you become solid enough in melee that you can start actually gishing and then, you realize that it's not really as effective as simply playing like a gimped wizard you were from the start.


That's not true at all. You're doing something wrong.

I've been trying to design a Swiftblade build for weeks because I instantly fell in love with the class after discovering it recently, but I keep coming up with the same conclusion as kme. Here's a thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=263736) I posted just yesterday about it.

Would love to see you two debate the subject.