Why Forgotten realms power level is not equal.

[CyberThread]

Okay so this is a thread from another source *afiak


I would like to purpose, that 3.5 based forgotten realms PRC's and abilities are not out of line compared to other settings.

We already "accept" that a level 20 fighter does not equal a level 20 wizard, so I would like to push forward on this conversation on a back drop for the forgotten realms.

This is a setting where you have gods that have walked the land, cosmic raiders, space elves, men who have challenged gods and become gods themselves, where wizards zoom around like super heros to fight devil lords.

Some aspects of this is going to reflect in the books created for the setting. Forgotten realm's PRC's tend to be very big reflections of area's and abilities, with some folks being more powerful in nature then others, just because of the setting. So it is not that PRC's are unbalanced in the setting, just that the fact , some things really are just more powerful then others, and it reflects.

[Fouredged Sword]

Good story does not make up for bad game design. Invalidating who sections of the game and sidelining most classes in favor of clerics and wizards is not good game design.

[dantiesilva]

Hey Runescared barbarian is decently powerful if you know what you are doing.

It is in fact one of my favorite classes to play when it is an open source and I use ettercap berserker on almost all my builds. I would even say it is more powerful then Shadow adept (I think thats the one) from FR in my eyes. You get to rage and cast spells, its is the ragemage, but for divine focused people and you don't need a single level of Cleric or Paladin, or any other caster to get in.

[Rebel7284]

Artificers are Eberron and can also be made tier 0, but besides that, yeah, the setting filled with Hathran, Incantatrix, and Red Wizard does make playing non-casters even more questionable.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Nobody has a problem with classes that are simply powerful.
The FR PrCs that people complain about go far beyond powerful and right into "break the game with minimal effort" territory at most tables.

Circle Magic is simply ridicolous if you use it anywhere near its potential. There's no way around that.
Hathran takes it a step further with spontaneus casting of any spell known and the fact that it requires Leadership, arguably one of the most broken feats in the game.

The same goes for Incantatrix's "persist any spell you want" power.
The system simply doesn't hold up at those levels of power without an experienced DM and lots of gentlemens agreements and houseruling and that's why people call it broken.

[Captnq]

Okay so this is a thread from another source
I would like to purpose, that 3.5 based forgotten realms PRC's and abilities are not out of line compared to other settings.


Sure. Works for me.

[TuggyNE]

I would like to purpose, that 3.5 based forgotten realms PRC's and abilities are not out of line compared to other settings.

We already "accept" that a level 20 fighter does not equal a level 20 wizard, so I would like to push forward on this conversation on a back drop for the forgotten realms.

This is a setting where you have gods that have walked the land, cosmic raiders, space elves, men who have challenged gods and become gods themselves, where wizards zoom around like super heros to fight devil lords.

Some aspects of this is going to reflect in the books created for the setting. Forgotten realm's PRC's tend to be very big reflections of area's and abilities, with some folks being more powerful in nature then others, just because of the setting. So it is not that PRC's are unbalanced in the setting, just that the fact , some things really are just more powerful then others, and it reflects.

I gotta admit, I'd never given the matter any thought until reading this thread, but I'm inclined to strongly disagree based largely on the wording here; when something is more powerful in the lore, you make it require more power, which means more levels. Fundamental principle of level-based systems, really.

[Endarire]

Perhaps the Faerun authors are just so used to magic made easy, or extreme power levels for magic and casters, that they assumed, "Let's load up the power level for Faerun."

The Incantatrix and Spellguard of Silverymoon PrCs, as well as the feat Persistent Spell, are in the same book, Player's Guide to Faerun. The Incantatrix's power is obvious (Cooperative Metamagic/Metamagic Effect + Persistent Spell) but the Spellguard's power is more subtle. Yes, Spellguard and Incantatrix combo to debatably allow the persisting of personal spells on others at touch range (some restrictions apply), but check out the Spellguard of Silverymoon's Selective Spell.

Selective Spell is intended to buff or harm creatures only of a specific (sub)type INT bonus times per day (minimum 1), but its casting time is a flat full-round action. Selective Spell minor creation? Selective Spell planar binding? Selective Spell genesis? Selective Spell astral projection? Selective Spell (epic spell with a stupidly long cast time)? Very much seems unintended, but it's RAW-legal.

Some of it is due to revisions. I heard that the Greenbound Summoning feat (the very powerful one from Lost Empires of Faerun) was originally intended to have a +2 spell slot adjustment, but that was removed before publishing time somehow.

It may also have been that whoever was assigned to the Faerun stuff knew he'd be leaving WotC soon. What better way to get fan love than to make super powerful stuff?

[Alleran]

Perhaps the Faerun authors are just so used to magic made easy, or extreme power levels for magic and casters, that they assumed, "Let's load up the power level for Faerun."

[...]

It may also have been that whoever was assigned to the Faerun stuff knew he'd be leaving WotC soon. What better way to get fan love than to make super powerful stuff?
Sometimes I actually just wonder if it was one or two specific designers who either loved spellcasting, had no concept of balance, just thought "hey, this would be cool" or even a combination of all three. And they just seemed to wind up on the Faerun book design end, either because they wanted it or the luck of the draw.

There's the Dweomerkeeper in Faiths & Pantheons, which is good, but not truly absurd. When it was revised for 3.5e in the Web Enhancement, it lost all the Faerun-specific stuff but also became the powerhouse that it is now. Incantatrix in 3rd edition was similarly good, but it isn't a patch on the 3.5e one. While Red Wizard was stripped of most of its setting-specific flavour when it was put into the core book, IIRC.

[Prime32]

Some aspects of this is going to reflect in the books created for the setting. Forgotten realm's PRC's tend to be very big reflections of area's and abilities, with some folks being more powerful in nature then others, just because of the setting. So it is not that PRC's are unbalanced in the setting, just that the fact , some things really are just more powerful then others, and it reflects."More powerful" is what "higher level" means; if some groups are more powerful that means they're higher level. Further, every setting has some groups being more powerful than others.

All classes are supposed to be equal in power, including fighter and wizard. The designers just screwed up because they played wizards who cast only fireball and never stopped to rest after running out of spells. All the fluff claims that characters of equal level are equal in power; if anything some of it (like the Drizzt books) implies that wizards are weaker than fighters.


This is a setting where you have gods that have walked the land, cosmic raiders, space elves, men who have challenged gods and become gods themselves, where wizards zoom around like super heros to fight devil lords.This is a setting where Battleragers (Races of Faerun) defeat characters with 9th level spells who know they're coming. Look at the Battlerager PrC. Look at it.

[Rebel7284]

Wait, so a standard fighter that can't be healed after the third round and can't use ranged weapons.... and may die at end of battle due to Con loss... oye.

[Talionis]

I agree that some of these things just should have been Epic.

Which is a purely separate debate from whether a Wizard and Fighter are adequately balanced. They aren't.

My big problem has not been the balance issue as much as the Wizard is far more complex and interesting than the Fighter. I'm not sure if that was on purpose, but Fighter powers seem to come from Feats, but the good ones come in Feat trees that have multiple feat tax. In the end, Wizards have large amounts of spells and Fighters really have one or two feats trees that don't present many options. Not to mention that there are so many Prestige Classes that progress the only ability of spellcasters at all or near full progression, but still provide fun interesting abilities. The fighters extra feats are not progressed by any prestige classes.

[CyberThread]

This is a setting where Battleragers (Races of Faerun) defeat characters with 9th level spells who know they're coming. Look at the Battlerager PrC. Look at it.

yeah but also look at what they wear


http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120226172531/forgottenrealms/images/thumb/2/24/ThibbledorfPwent.jpg/186px-ThibbledorfPwent.jpg

[TrollCapAmerica]

FR has always had a tradition of packing overpowered crap into it since its debut in the 80s.The only reason it isnt a problem nowadays its the overpowered stuff isnt as NPC and setting exclusive as it used to be and its not the setting with the designers favorite pet characters in it

[kamikasei]

I would like to purpose, that 3.5 based forgotten realms PRC's and abilities are not out of line compared to other settings.
Your title and the rest of your argument seem to contradict this, explaining that FR material is more unbalanced than other parts of 3.5, and defending this as simply how the setting is.

So what exactly are you trying to say? If it's just that FR material shouldn't be used outside FR without caution, I don't think that's very controversial.

[Psyren]

Balance is a quaint and foolish notion in-universe. If one guy can use a pointy stick really well and the other can rewrite reality by gesturing at it, obviously the second guy is going to be more powerful.

But in the end it doesn't matter - in FR, wizards and clerics/gods keep each other in check. Thanks to Mystra's quirky miniboss squad Chosen, nobody is going to become Pun-Pun or create Tippyverse.

[Prime32]

yeah but also look at what they wear


http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120226172531/forgottenrealms/images/thumb/2/24/ThibbledorfPwent.jpg/186px-ThibbledorfPwent.jpgMy point is that the fluff says Battleragers will beat Wizards 9 times out of 10. The mechanics say they'll die before they get within a hundred miles. Hence the designers weren't making FR imbalanced on purpose.

[CyberThread]

in a 3.5 context, how much of a heavy upgrade would they need to actually hold up to lore for melee combat*without them being gish*

[sleepyphoenixx]

Balance is a quaint and foolish notion in-universe. If one guy can use a pointy stick really well and the other can rewrite reality by gesturing at it, obviously the second guy is going to be more powerful.

But in the end it doesn't matter - in FR, wizards and clerics/gods keep each other in check. Thanks to Mystra's quirky miniboss squad Chosen, nobody is going to become Pun-Pun or create Tippyverse.

Mystra's Chosen are kind of crappy though, at least those that we have stats for. Honestly, DC 24 as the highest save on a CR 34 caster? Terrible CL and feat selection?
No synergy between abilities at all? :smallconfused:
Most of them aren't a credible threat for a halfway optimized level 20 character despite being high in the epic levels, let alone a full party.

At least if the designers assumed that characters were being build like that i can see how they thought the FR books were balanced. :smalltongue:

[Prime32]

in a 3.5 context, how much of a heavy upgrade would they need to actually hold up to lore for melee combat*without them being gish*As many immunities as an iron golem, and the ability to break magical prisons by headbutting them. For a start.

[CyberThread]

haha, oh god, I can just see all the builds that would be around it.


Be like the, Help me build a good druid! And everyone smirks when they say planar shepherd !

[DeltaEmil]

As many immunities as an iron golem, and the ability to break magical prisons by headbutting them. For a start.Also, improved evasion, mettle, fast healing, slippery mind, opportunist, all good saves, a natural deflection bonus to AC, an extraordinary fear effect that always makes spellcasters shaken or frightened with no saving throw or immunity against fear effects allowed, which also causes the spellcaster to behave as if his intelligence score was reduced by 10-20 points, at-will defensive roll ability, at-will stunning fists that they can make with weapon attacks without needing the ki focus ability, the ability to always make saving throws against harmful spells that normally don't allow saving throws at all, at least a 1/day free action ability that every d20 roll in 1 or more rounds is considered to be a natural 20 if it benefits the mundane melee guy, barbarian and monk fast movement, at-will tireless mighty rage whirling frenzy ferocity without any of the restrictions, all iterative attacks at the highest base attack bonus, which must be at least equal to character level or hit dice, the ability to always act in a surprise round, improved uncanny dodge, blind-fight, slow fall like a level 20 monk, timeless body, purity of body, and much more. The inherent rule that spellcasters cannot have more than 9 character levels, and only the mundane melee character can go up to level 20. Leadership feat that allows them to summon a mundane army with all the same ability, with no penalties ever to the cohort and follower modifiers, even if the character sacrifices them all on a dark altar to a cruel deity for fleeting benefits.

All of this beginning at character level 1.

And even then are they still in a big disadvantage against spellcasters.

[Psyren]

Mystra's Chosen are kind of crappy though, at least those that we have stats for. Honestly, DC 24 as the highest save on a CR 34 caster? Terrible CL and feat selection?
No synergy between abilities at all? :smallconfused:
Most of them aren't a credible threat for a halfway optimized level 20 character despite being high in the epic levels, let alone a full party.

At least if the designers assumed that characters were being build like that i can see how they thought the FR books were balanced. :smalltongue:

Agreed, but luckily, their foes are either just as poorly built or too busy fighting among themselves (e.g. Red Wizards) to be an actual threat.

And besides, you've got Mystra herself playing goalie even if they screw up. "Now to destroy the Harpers forever! First, I summon Mirror Mephit, then... hey, where did my powers go??"

[Vedhin]

Agreed, but luckily, their foes are either just as poorly built or too busy fighting among themselves (e.g. Red Wizards) to be an actual threat.

And besides, you've got Mystra herself playing goalie even if they screw up. "Now to destroy the Harpers forever! First, I summon Mirror Mephit, then... hey, where did my powers go??"

Which is why Psions should be ruling Faerun. They don't care about capricious deities (other than a patron so they can be rezzed if needed), and have a in-character reason to be super-intelligent and optimized.

[CRtwenty]

After reading this thread, I'm glad I never got into the FR fluff. It seems pretty silly.

[russdm]

After reading this thread, I'm glad I never got into the FR fluff. It seems pretty silly.

That happens to be the low end of it. The high end ends up involving blinking and then shrugging. FR Fluff is simply there for the lore addicts and most of it wrecks most DMing opportunities anyway.

Book plots, however great, make bad game(or running games really) plots. Something the crazy designers in FR didn't really learn well.

[CyberThread]

Meh , I got into it from the books, and the source books only help to grow from that. An the sundering only helps to aid in my hunger of lore ....


As for laying it as a game, plenty of places to play it, just respect and exepct that it is not your homebrew setting, but you have full control over what year or aspects you want in your version of the realms.

[Alleran]

Agreed, but luckily, their foes are either just as poorly built or too busy fighting among themselves (e.g. Red Wizards) to be an actual threat.
I don't have the statblocks in front of me, but IIRC, both Manshoon and Szass Tam (who were statted up in the ELH) should have more than enough firepower to tear apart any one of the Chosen short of the Simbul (only because she has Epic Spellcasting - otherwise, she's almost as bad as Storm). Manshoon is something like a 25th level caster (Wizard 20 / Archmage 5), and Szass is a CR 31-ish Lich Necromancer with the full gamut of Red Wizard levels, so their builds, while not exactly amazing (they don't dip into things like Incantatrix), aren't exactly weak - it's full wizard casting. There's also that evil-aligned disciple of Auril in the book who has Epic Spellcasting.

The Chosen, by contrast, are laughably bad, far worse than their opponents. Alustriel has two or three sorcerer levels that do absolutely nothing for her, Storm is some bizarre mix of Rogue, Fighter, Sorcerer, Bard and Harper Agent that makes no sense, the Simbul might have Epic Spellcasting but is left with 20 Sorcerer levels and ten levels of Wizard because I don't know, maybe the person in charge of the statblock was drunk or high at the time (and she has at-will supernatural Shapechange because of wish spells and magical experimentation on herself...). She's supposed to canonically have more raw power even than Elminster. Laeral is statted up in City of Splendours, and she sucks. She's got 19th level wizard casting strapped on to about seven or eight levels in Ranger.

Khelben is Wizard with some Archmage. He's probably the best-built, which isn't saying much. Elminster has the most levels (35!), but they're also terrible. Two in Rogue? If he wanted evasion, he just needed to fork out 25k gold. Three in Cleric? If he was going for Initiate of Mystra, he obviously forgot to get it. Fighter... why? He might have his 29 Wizard and Archmage levels, but I'd give good odds to Szass any day in terms of mechanics.

In a one-on-one, they pretty much need their fancy Chosen of Mystra template (which is largely defensive instead of offensive) just to compete. When I was browsing it I did notice something about the silver fire. Once every 70 minutes, 4d12 damage, DC 23 Reflex half, 70 foot range. Pretty terrible, but the description also states that it will automatically overcome magical barriers and spell resistance. Just what qualifies as a "magical barrier" isn't stated, so it might come in handy as a start-of-battle debuff, depending on how it's read.

Other than that, though? About the only thing keeping them in the game is that most of them work together, so if you mess with one of them then half a dozen others are likely to come down on your head, plus all their buddies from organisations they founded (e.g. Harpers).

[Spuddles]

Good story does not make up for bad game design. Invalidating who sections of the game and sidelining most classes in favor of clerics and wizards is not good game design.

It's actually perfectly fine game design, if you don't pretend that all the classes are balanced.

[MeiLeTeng]

It's actually perfectly fine game design, if you don't pretend that all the classes are balanced.

I don't disagree, but as far as I can tell everyone involved in the design of 3.X (and pathfinder for that matter) believe the classes to be perfectly (or at least well enough) balanced. At which point they did a poor job.

I still enjoy the game personally, but I know it isn't balanced and I just choose to play that way nonetheless.

[Psyren]

I don't have the statblocks in front of me, but IIRC, both Manshoon and Szass Tam (who were statted up in the ELH) should have more than enough firepower to tear apart any one of the Chosen short of the Simbul (only because she has Epic Spellcasting - otherwise, she's almost as bad as Storm).

The Chosen are also running around with artifacts, such as Khelben's staff and Elminster's... everything, I think. And the stats on those tend to be whatever the plot needs them to be, so their actual builds may be irrelevant.

But I did mention in the second half of my statement that the baddies spend too much time fighting each other. Manshoon is Zhentarim, Szass is a Red - they already hate each other's guts. If one of them went on the offensive, it would pretty much be a tossup whether the Chosen or the other one would screw him first.

[Alleran]

The Chosen are also running around with artifacts, such as Khelben's staff and Elminster's... everything, I think. And the stats on those tend to be whatever the plot needs them to be, so their actual builds may be irrelevant.
Neither of them have artifacts that I can recall offhand (although Elminster has been stated to wear a Greenstone Amulet in novels, a minor artifact that grants a continuous mind blank in game mechanics). Khelben's "legendary blackstaff" is a staff of power with a permanencied blackstaff spell on it. Elminster's most expensive item is his 400000gp pipe (it has a couple of at-will spells on it, like pyrotechnics and dimension door). Granted, they probably have some artifacts stashed away somewhere, but it's not part of their statblocks. Out of sight, out of mind.


But I did mention in the second half of my statement that the baddies spend too much time fighting each other. Manshoon is Zhentarim, Szass is a Red - they already hate each other's guts. If one of them went on the offensive, it would pretty much be a tossup whether the Chosen or the other one would screw him first.
True, until Szass overthrew everybody else in Thay during the switchover to 4E and is now the undisputed ruler of a largely-dead nation with vast undead armies (that he is still increasing), so his infighting is, for the most part, dead. Elminster also tried to kill Manshoon (who is also now a very powerful vampire) in a recent novel and failed. Good always stagnates quite a bit, but Evil, if anything, has only gotten stronger (and continues to increase).

[CyberThread]

Forgotten realms



The place where you can see the archhobo, pushing a Adamantine shopping cart carrying artifacts of a lost dead gods spine and various trinkets.

[Psyren]

True, until Szass overthrew everybody else in Thay during the switchover to 4E and is now the undisputed ruler of a largely-dead nation with vast undead armies (that he is still increasing), so his infighting is, for the most part, dead. Elminster also tried to kill Manshoon (who is also now a very powerful vampire) in a recent novel and failed. Good always stagnates quite a bit, but Evil, if anything, has only gotten stronger (and continues to increase).

Are we talking 4e? Their stats hardly matter anymore in that case :smalltongue:

Manshoon is not only a vampire, I believe he has several clones stashed away too. In any event, I doubt his fondness for Szass has grown between editions.

Good will always triumph, because Evil is dumb.

[Alleran]

Are we talking 4e? Their stats hardly matter anymore in that case :smalltongue:
True, I suppose. I mentioned it largely in the vein that the "Evil watches its back too much" thing isn't necessarily the case anymore, at least for Szass.


Manshoon is not only a vampire, I believe he has several clones stashed away too.
They killed each other off a few years back during what was creatively called the Manshoon Wars, when all the Manshoons woke up at the same time for some unexplained reason. Vampireshoon is the only one left.

Allegedly, mind you.

[Petrocorus]

All classes are supposed to be equal in power, including fighter and wizard. The designers just screwed up because they played wizards who cast only fireball and never stopped to rest after running out of spells. All the fluff claims that characters of equal level are equal in power; if anything some of it (like the Drizzt books) implies that wizards are weaker than fighters.


Totally agree. I believe the designer solved a lot of the problems from 1st and 2nd editions with the 3.0 and 3.5, but they playtested it by playing like with the 2nd. They thought that wizards would keep fireballing around, the druids would fight with their scimitar and wildshape once in a while for scouting etc...
They didn't figured that some of the problems they fixed, like the multiclassing system, contained actual balancing rules, like the different leveling table for each class, which got lost in the fixing. And there was the big inflation of the numbers of splatbooks which all added new spells, feats and PrC, sometimes (too often) badly worded.

I wouldn't be surprise if the writers of the PGtF were thinking that players would use Incantatrix to do empowered maximized delay blast fireball rather that for persisting dozens of buffs.

[TuggyNE]

Balance is a quaint and foolish notion in-universe. If one guy can use a pointy stick really well and the other can rewrite reality by gesturing at it, obviously the second guy is going to be more powerful.

The problem with this argument is that, for the most part, levels are also a quaint and foolish notion (or at least one that should not generally be directly observable). One metagame construct should balance another, no?

[Psyren]

The problem with this argument is that, for the most part, levels are also a quaint and foolish notion (or at least one that should not generally be directly observable). One metagame construct should balance another, no?

Levels (in tandem with WBL) are for comparing PCs to monsters, not to each other. If my monk or fighter with the right gear can defeat a barbed devil, the fact that the wizard can do it a dozen more ways doesn't detract from my accomplishment.

The main purpose of levels is a quick way to tell me "you'll probably die if you try this now, unless you're really good at optimizing" or "this may be challenging, but manageable" or "this should be a cakewalk for you."

[TuggyNE]

Levels (in tandem with WBL) are for comparing PCs to monsters, not to each other. If my monk or fighter with the right gear can defeat a barbed devil, the fact that the wizard can do it a dozen more ways doesn't detract from my accomplishment.

That's not true at all; levels are also very much intended to be used for intra-party comparison. That's why you should generally start a party at similar levels, why you gain extra XP for being behind in levels, why ECL was invented, why CR adjustment was (initially?) used in PF for the same purpose, and so on and so forth. Levels are all about character power for all reference purposes, including party balance.

You can't reasonably stick a level 1 Fighter and a level 20 Fighter in the same party; even if encounters are not atrociously ill-matched, one will completely outshine the other.

[sleepyphoenixx]

(Builds of epic characters stuff)
...
Other than that, though? About the only thing keeping them in the game is that most of them work together, so if you mess with one of them then half a dozen others are likely to come down on your head, plus all their buddies from organisations they founded (e.g. Harpers).

The problem isn't only their terribly builds. It's the fact that you have CR 30-45 enemies with save dcs in the low 20s. They couldn't seriously threaten a normal level 20 character with standard magic items with those. Their ability scores, attacks and AC are absolutely pitiful, their spell loadout is usually subpar and their equipment is often hardly sufficient for a character half their level.
Most of them don't even wear an item to boost their casting stat.

[CyberThread]

before we bang any more drumbs, remember most of these stats are 3e, back when they thought it was dangerous to give melee spells.

[TuggyNE]

before we bang any more drumbs, remember most of these stats are 3e, back when they thought it was dangerous to give melee spells.

You're really selling your thesis here.

[CyberThread]

Sort of gave up on that, this sort of got more into a bash-a-thon and just recently came back to reasonable conversation.

[Psyren]

That's not true at all; levels are also very much intended to be used for intra-party comparison. That's why you should generally start a party at similar levels, why you gain extra XP for being behind in levels, why ECL was invented, why CR adjustment was (initially?) used in PF for the same purpose, and so on and so forth. Levels are all about character power for all reference purposes, including party balance.

You gain extra XP for being behind because, presumably, you're facing a greater challenge than everyone else.

D&D is a team game; it's not designed for these kinds of arm-wrestling pissing contests between players in a party. You're comparing the quarterback to the wide receiver and saying they should be in the same position on the field, but that makes no sense. People play the role they want to play because they want to, and each has its own value. They may not have the same individual responsibilities, but both contribute to the team's success.



You can't reasonably stick a level 1 Fighter and a level 20 Fighter in the same party; even if encounters are not atrociously ill-matched, one will completely outshine the other.

That is again due to the monsters, not the PCs. Either they will be challenging for the Fighter 20 (and thus obliterate the Fighter 1) or they will be challenging for the Fighter 1 and therefore cake for the Fighter 20.

[Norin]

Elminsters "build" is not put together to be amazingly powerful or optimal. It reflects on his background

Read the books detailing his history and you will understand why he has fighter, rogue and cleric "dips".

It's a matter of storytelling, not game mechanics.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Elminsters "build" is not put together to be amazingly powerful or optimal. It reflects on his background

Read the books detailing his history and you will understand why he has fighter, rogue and cleric "dips".

It's a matter of storytelling, not game mechanics.

He would be weak even if he only had his wizard levels. The useless dips only add insult to injury.
According to fluff he's one of the most powerful arcane magic users alive. That should be reflected by his build imo.
As it is he'd have problems against some things straight out of core that are barely more than half his CR.

If you're going to stat out a figure as integral to the setting as Elminster he should be overpowering, head and shoulders above anything else at his (supposed) level. Bend the rules if you have to, he's a legend after all.

If you're gonna do as half assed a job of it as the writers that statted him did it would be a lot better not to bother and keep it vague.

[Alleran]

Read the books detailing his history and you will understand why he has fighter, rogue and cleric "dips".
I'm well aware of his history. That doesn't mean his history is well-represented in the mechanics, even assuming he didn't bother retraining. Also how his life in said books is pretty much one catastrophe after another for the most part. But building an Elminster that represents at least most of his history and yet also matches with what the books allow for in 3rd edition isn't exactly hard.

Rogue 2 / Cleric 3 / Wizard 10 / Mystic Theurge 10 / Archmage 5

Done. He keeps the Rogue levels, which grant him the martial proficiencies for any fighting he does in his early years (according to Ed Greenwood he uses that +5 sword more as a walking stick than an actual weapon about 95% of the time, and at the times when he's doing Fighter-y things at any later date he's got enough levels that his BAB is plenty high enough anyway) and holds to his time spent post-Athalantar and pre-Mystra. After he became a cleric of Mystra, he's canonically cast spells that are at least 5th level (including either a Raise Dead or a Resurrection spell), so that's where Mystic Theurge comes in to boost his divine spellcasting (after all, a Cleric 3 can't exactly resurrect the dead). He has wizarding ability, but it doesn't really go into high gear until towards the end of Making of a Mage, so most of his wizard levels beyond the minimum to qualify for Mystic Theurge are going to happen either then, or after he arrives in Myth Drannor to learn from the elves.

Give him Practiced Spellcaster and his CL 29 casting is maintained, he stays an Archmage, add the Initiate of Mystra feat somewhere because it fits thematically and he qualifies for it. Maybe strap on Divine Metamagic and/or Persistent Spell, since he can use his divine spell slots to fuel some all-day buffs and rely primarily on his Wizard casting otherwise, which he seems to do. Round off the build with Epic Spellcasting to represent his knowledge of mythals and other similarly powerful spells, season with other feats to flavour (maybe Improved Spell Capacity to maintain his 10th level spell slots), add on the Chosen of Mystra template and you're set. A CR 34 Elminster that holds to his history, uses up five fewer levels, and who will probably be a much bigger challenge to the party.

Or you could just do what the old 1E (I think) Waterdeep book did with Khelben. State that he's Xth level, and whatever level the party is, add more levels as necessary to maintain separation.

[Psyren]

I agree that Elminster would be much better represented with the retraining rules. (I see him as more of a Dweomerkeeper than a MT though.)



Or you could just do what the old 1E (I think) Waterdeep book did with Khelben. State that he's Xth level, and whatever level the party is, add more levels as necessary to maintain separation.

...At the start of the campaign at least. Eventually, I think the PCs should be able to overtake and even take on the Chosen, making their mark on the world if they see fit.

[Alleran]

I agree that Elminster would be much better represented with the retraining rules. (I see him as more of a Dweomerkeeper than a MT though.)
Probably. Taking out four of the MT levels and replacing them with Dweomerkeeper levels (boosting Wizard casting) gives him a use of Supernatural Spell and leaves him still able to cast 5th level cleric spells. Or drop some of the Wizard levels for Dweomerkeeper stuff instead, either or.


...At the start of the campaign at least. Eventually, I think the PCs should be able to overtake and even take on the Chosen, making their mark on the world if they see fit.
I don't disagree. Most games I've played in that got to a level where we were within spitting distance of the average level of the Chosen usually took up planar adventuring instead of hanging around in Realmspace, though, so I didn't really think of it. It's much more interesting out on the Wheel, in my opinion at least.

[Morty]

I wonder how much of the iconic NPCs' crazy level spread is due to their history, and how much of it is because those were the earliest days of 3.0 and multiclassing was the new, cool thing.

Either way, the caster/mundane relations in FR are kind of... weird. The 3.0 FRCS book does seem to ignore the notion of inter-class balance, putting the casters on a pedestal - and, ironically, it accurately describes the actual situation. I'm not sure how it looks in the other material, since I've only read the FRCS and one Drizzt book, in which spellcasters are pretty squarely on top - Artemis Entreri gets his rear handed to him on a silver platter by a battle wizard.

[Karnith]

I wonder how much of the iconic NPCs' crazy level spread is due to their history, and how much of it is because those were the earliest days of 3.0 and multiclassing was the new, cool thing.
From what I've heard, they were probably trying to convert old 2E character builds to 3.0 versions of said characters (possibly even using this (http://www.amazon.com/Dungeons-Dragons-Conversion-Skip-Williams/dp/B0006RK1II) to do it). Because of the way old dual-classing and multiclassing transferred to 3.0 multiclassing (or didn't, rather), we ended up with a lot of crippled builds.

[TrollCapAmerica]

From what I've heard, they were probably trying to convert old 2E character builds to 3.0 versions of said characters (possibly even using this (http://www.amazon.com/Dungeons-Dragons-Conversion-Skip-Williams/dp/B0006RK1II) to do it). Because of the way old dual-classing and multiclassing transferred to 3.0 multiclassing (or didn't, rather), we ended up with a lot of crippled builds.

Pretty much this.

You have to remember the 2nd ed FR iconic characters broke game rules constantly and were wildly overpowered for that edition getting a bunch of super-powers unavailable to PCs and being able to pile on things like spellfire or duel-class levels without restriction

Then you transfer to 3rd ed and the levels of fighter or thief that made them able to do anything in 2nd are suddenly pointless and just raise their EL.Most of the broken abilities dont exist anymore and anything they can do PCs can do because the house isnt stacked for the Mary Sue self-insert TSR characters anymore that they needed to hype up so they could keep selling books.This edition is about the players not the product

The second factor is playtesting.We all know that the playtesting was done wrong but when we factor that idea in and start looking at the iconic PCs we can start to see where they screwed up again

I personally dont care really because I never liked the FR origins and thought Greyhawk NPCs were much better without being as forcefed down your throat.So long as Mordenkainen is the top wizard in "official" D&D I could care less

[Petrocorus]

I personally dont care really because I never liked the FR origins and thought Greyhawk NPCs were much better without being as forcefed down your throat.So long as Mordenkainen is the top wizard in "official" D&D I could care less

IIRC, in 1nd ed, Mordenkainen was lvl 20 or 21 while Elminster was 26. IIRC, Mordenkainen was Gygax's PC, but Gygax tended to be more reasonable about mary-sueing than the writers who followed him. And Greyhawk seemed to be less overpowered than FR.

[TrollCapAmerica]

IIRC, in 1nd ed, Mordenkainen was lvl 20 or 21 while Elminster was 26. IIRC, Mordenkainen was Gygax's PC, but Gygax tended to be more reasonable about mary-sueing than the writers who followed him. And Greyhawk seemed to be less overpowered than FR.

You would be correct.DMPCs everywhere in 2nd ed FR drove me crazy and often overshadowed alot of the cool concepts in the setting.

In the 3rd ed updates Morde just edges out the FR guys in pure wizard levels which IMO is how it should be.Both because its Garys character and because he had the restraint to NOT wildly overpower him back in the old days

[cerin616]

I think the big problem with FR is that the stories that came out about it ended up becoming legit lore into the world.

I am sure it was perfectly fine as a campaign setting when Greenwood first made it. The real problem is that when TSR began to publish stories in the setting, those stories became mechanics.

[Psyren]

I think the big problem with FR is that the stories that came out about it ended up becoming legit lore into the world.

I am sure it was perfectly fine as a campaign setting when Greenwood first made it. The real problem is that when TSR began to publish stories in the setting, those stories became mechanics.

Agreed, they decided to go the route of statting every single thing that showed up in a book somewhere. Shadow Weave, mythals, Nether Scrolls, moonblades - no matter how much the concept in question screamed "not for player use" they dropped in (largely untested) ways for players to use it, ignoring their perfectly serviceable Incantation system in the process.

I'm almost certain Cheater Initiate of Mystra showed up in a book too. Some really devoted concubine servant of Mystra ended up in an antimagic zone somewhere, and conjured up so many images of his goddess in his mind's eye that his raging bon dedication to the Art was able to repair the Weave momentarily and escape.

[TuggyNE]

You gain extra XP for being behind because, presumably, you're facing a greater challenge than everyone else.

Quite so. Challenge should be (more or less) equalized, and the game takes steps to prevent severe inequality.


D&D is a team game

I'm gonna stop you right there, because that's very often a bad excuse used as a club against in-character logic, sensible optimization, game balance, and other things.

It's a team game, but that doesn't mean it should be wildly unequal in obvious and measurable ways; even if different members have different jobs, they should all be of approximately equal significance, and the loss of one member should never be vastly more crippling than the loss of a different one.


That is again due to the monsters, not the PCs. Either they will be challenging for the Fighter 20 (and thus obliterate the Fighter 1) or they will be challenging for the Fighter 1 and therefore cake for the Fighter 20.

Yes, and your point is? It's impossible to balance encounters for that pair, yes?

Point made, case rests.

[Psyren]

I'm gonna stop you right there, because that's very often a bad excuse used as a club against in-character logic, sensible optimization, game balance, and other things.

It seems to me that you are the one furthest away from in-character logic at the moment. Again, one guy alters reality by talking to it, one is good with a pointy stick - for them to be equal in capability and contribution would be quite illogical.

"Sensible optimization" is decided upon by each playgroup, as it should be. Mandating it through forced egalitarianism is simultaneously dull, stifling, and unrealistic within the setting of any magic universe.



Yes, and your point is? It's impossible to balance encounters for that pair, yes?

You're operating on the misguided assumption that they are somehow in a competition with each other. That one being more capable means that one "wins" and the other one "loses." That's not how D&D works.

I agree, you shouldn't put them both in the same party, but that's again because of the monsters. It has nothing to do with the classes themselves.

Now, if you define "balance" as "everyone can contribute," then we can have common ground. The offensive line (melee) keeping the wizard (quarterback) safe so he can make the match-winning plays is a balanced encounter.

[ryu]

The comparison was a level one fighter and a level twenty fighter, not two different classes. Tell me what possible way does a level 1 fighter have to be relevant in an encounter where a level 20 exists?

[Rubik]

The comparison was a level one fighter and a level twenty fighter, not two different classes. Tell me what possible way does a level 1 fighter have to be relevant in an encounter where a level 20 exists?The difference between a level 20 wizard and a level 20 fighter is approximately the same as the fighter 20 and fighter 1, if not more so.

[ryu]

Agreed, but you have to use the same class in the argument that you shouldn't be putting people of drastically different levels together like that.

[CyberThread]

The argument is extradite, but a good example between a wizard and fighter.


IN REALITY " Coughs" IN a fantasy game, it is really hard to balance a magic user and a fighter, you see it in multiple games.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Balancing magic is a nice sentiment but on the other hand magic should be powerful. 3.5's versatile and powerful magic is, to me, one of it's strong points.
It just feels "right" to be a powerful magic user and not just the dude that does the same thing as the fighter, only from range and with elemental effects.

Of course that means that fighters should be given options too. I personally like ToB and think expanding it would do a lot for melee but to a lot of people it's "too anime" or "too wuxia" and not what a fighter should be. I don't know how else you'd bring fighters closer to mages though.
There's been lots of ideas and tries to balance magic against melee but they all either fail at true balance or turn magic into just another boring damage delivery mechanic.

[TuggyNE]

It seems to me that you are the one furthest away from in-character logic at the moment. Again, one guy alters reality by talking to it, one is good with a pointy stick - for them to be equal in capability and contribution would be quite illogical.

It's self-evident that the scope of reality-alteration, and what's more the rate at which the caster expands that scope, is dependent on the way the class is defined: you can't cast wish at first level, and how fast do you learn new spell arrangements? Usually there's a great deal of study required, or unusual bloodlines or divine favor or what-have-you can speed things up somewhat. So saying, "one guy is awesome and the other guy is lame" is fallacious, because there's a whole spectrum for each of them. This spectrum is what we call "levels".

Furthermore, of course, "mundane" characters should reasonably take inspiration from heroes of older stories that accomplished astonishing deeds beyond the abilities of mortals, without needing to focus on magic. Any characters that don't live up to those stories are obviously lower level than them.

Now, after all that, if you want to say "spellcasters gain levels much faster in FR lore than other characters do because they're awesome and I love them", I won't stop you, but I don't think that's wise. What I will object to, though, is treating levels as something defined primarily from an in-character perspective; they're really a metagame construct that then separates the in-character abilities.


"Sensible optimization" is decided upon by each playgroup, as it should be. Mandating it through forced egalitarianism is simultaneously dull, stifling, and unrealistic within the setting of any magic universe.

Sorry, that's not what I was getting at; I meant that the same phrase is used to decry several largely-unconnected phenomena.

If anything, optimization should be used to maintain balance.


You're operating on the misguided assumption that they are somehow in a competition with each other. That one being more capable means that one "wins" and the other one "loses." That's not how D&D works.

Only to the extent that most people, by and large, like to be in the same ballpark as their friends; if one of them is crucial to the team, and another is nigh-useless, that's not much fun. Sure, label it competiveness if you like, but this isn't Ungame.


Now, if you define "balance" as "everyone can contribute," then we can have common ground. The offensive line (melee) keeping the wizard (quarterback) safe so he can make the match-winning plays is a balanced encounter.

It would be if the wizard actually needed that, yes. :smalltongue:

[Psyren]

It's self-evident that the scope of reality-alteration, and what's more the rate at which the caster expands that scope, is dependent on the way the class is defined: you can't cast wish at first level, and how fast do you learn new spell arrangements? Usually there's a great deal of study required, or unusual bloodlines or divine favor or what-have-you can speed things up somewhat. So saying, "one guy is awesome and the other guy is lame" is fallacious, because there's a whole spectrum for each of them. This spectrum is what we call "levels".

Even at first level, casters are redefining reality. For example, conjuring up concealing fog in the heat of a desert sun, or telling those attacking bugbears how sleepy they are and they should really lie down in the middle of combat. Wish is an extreme example but it's not even necessary.



Furthermore, of course, "mundane" characters should reasonably take inspiration from heroes of older stories that accomplished astonishing deeds beyond the abilities of mortals, without needing to focus on magic. Any characters that don't live up to those stories are obviously lower level than them.

That depends on how you define "focus on magic." I agree that such characters should not need innate magic abilities, but the system does require them to have various mystic defenses and enchantments over time - this is the purpose behind WBL guidelines.



Now, after all that, if you want to say "spellcasters gain levels much faster in FR lore than other characters do because they're awesome and I love them"

I don't, so I'll stop you right there.

Levels serve one purpose and one purpose only - helping you know at a glance what kind of challenges you can take on now. Letting you know when you're ready to graduate from zombie to vampire to lich, or wyrmling to young adult to great wyrm. It's a very rough guideline since it doesn't take much more than a very rudimentary optimization into account, and of course some CRs are borked, but by and large that is the idea behind the system. It's not intended as a intra-party pissing contest and never was.



Sorry, that's not what I was getting at; I meant that the same phrase is used to decry several largely-unconnected phenomena.

What phrase? "D&D is a team game?"
Because that phrase is very much related to optimization, balance, logic etc.



If anything, optimization should be used to maintain balance.

I agree, but optimization is a function of the player, not the system.




Only to the extent that most people, by and large, like to be in the same ballpark as their friends; if one of them is crucial to the team, and another is nigh-useless, that's not much fun. Sure, label it competiveness if you like, but this isn't Ungame.

This is a blatant strawman - I've never said anyone should be "nigh-useless." Quite the opposite. The offensive line is not useless to the quarterback at all, even if he scores most of the touchdowns. Moreover, they do not feel useless. If they do, that is the DM's fault.



It would be if the wizard actually needed that, yes. :smalltongue:

The wizard can function without one, but doing so is inefficient at best and dangerous at worst (if the DM knows what he is doing.) To quote Saph: "I'm the DM, I can challenge any T1 class." It's really not that hard to get everyone involved and make the casters want to have meatshields around.

[Bonzai]

Most of the complaints are a function of 3.5 more than realms specific issues. Wizards are more powerful than fighters. That's not the Realms fault. The Realms had plenty of Iconic fighter types. Drizzt, Gareth Dragon's Bane, Mirt, Azoun, etc...(no clue about 4th edition, I've ignored it completely). The reason that there tends to be more iconic casters than fighters comes down to a very mundane reason. Age. A Caster has many ways to cheat death. A fighter can buy a potion of longevity if he is wealthy enough, but that's about it unless he wants to become a vampire (which most won't). There is a reason that the only Epic fighter character who was stated out was a Chosen of Gilgeam. It's what allowed him to live long enough to achieve that level. If you think about it, most of the iconic characters are immortal in one way or another, or very long lived (Drizzt).

NPC's level and gain wealth at a far different rate than players, and should not be held to the same standards. I really don't understand the complaints that people have about the NPC's builds and stats. They are stated to reflect their lives and back story by authors who are only casual role players. Elminister didn't choreograph his life to min max his potential. Aside from that, players should have the opportunity to be able to stand toe to toe with Iconic characters if they advance far enough. If all the Chosen were Pun Pun, then imagine the all of the complaints the players would have.

[russdm]

You all (others) seem to operating on the erronous concepts:

1) D&D is a team game.
Sorry, but if this was true, then the designers would have gone to more effort to make it function better like this. In the football example, the quarterback needs that line backer or he gets tackled and brought down. The line backer's job of guarding the quarterback makes the quarterback able to do his/her job. Without that line backer, it is harder for the quarterback to do his/her job. It is similiar in other team sports.

D&D is not a team sport though. If the quarterback(wizard) is missing his/her line backer(fighter), it makes no difference because the wizard can still work. Teams function by having the different members contribute their unique skills and make the party/team stronger. That applies for team sports and military events, and a few others, but not D&D ever.

D&D does not possess unique areas/skills for anything than other T1-T3/T4s. The others have their stuff duplicated or replaced better by something better. Nor does the game by design encourage team building or teamwork at the expense of lone wolves. Have a poorly coordinated team is not suffering any worse than a highly coordinated team nor is there anything better happening for the highly coordinated team versus the poorly coordinated team.

Most of the best options in D&D work better in single character play that multiple characters or as teams.

2) Imbalance makes for good balance or fun.

Having a system that ends up wrecking most of it is supposed to do, is a sign of bad game design. The imbalance in 3.5 is not good game design at all. It was built for a party concept that was no longer applicable and one that cannot be the standard with every option beyond the standard not tested.

For those with delusions, playing a character that appears to suck while looking at everything the wizard is doing starts to become unfun. this is even for when the wizard is trying not to overshadow the other classes. No matter how much you can try to, you will not forget/notice the fact the wizard could simply do more cool things than you. When you get to levels where the wizard is just ending encounters with spells and the like, it starts to make the weaker classes/players feel unuseful or excess baggage.

The game design of course supports this because it does things with wizards that make it appear that the other players are not needed.

Seriously, how many FR icons are weapon combat types and how many are spellcasters?
Elminister-Spellcaster
the chosen-all spellcasters
Szass-spellcaster
mansshoon-spellcaster
khelben blackstaff-spellcaster
mad halaster-spellcaster
mad halaster's apprentices-spellcasters
red wizards of thay-spellcasters
witches of rashamon-spellcasters
harpers-lots of spellcasters with some that aren't
simbul-spellcaster
Drizzt-weapon combat
brunor-weapon combat
regg(drizzt halfling buddy)-comic relief, he actually doesn't ever really fight
catti-brie-weapon combat
wulfgar-weapon combat
artemis entreri-weapon combat
jarlaxe-both to some extent

the weapon combat system is considerably far weaken than the magic combat system. At the start, at level 1, a fighter is not that much better than a wizard and is less better than a cleric/druid. At level 5, a fighter is significantly less better than a wizard, and is out of league with a cleric/druid. at level 10, a fighter is out of league with a wizard, and is the comic relief to a cleric/druid. This imbalance is built directly into the system and frequently rears its head.

3) The gentleman's agreement nullifies bad game design

Any game that relies on something made by the game's players/users to remove or lessen an effect by the game's design is piss poor game design. It relies solely on people who are either mature or decent enough to employ it and if the players are not mature enough or decent enough, then they just won't use it.

4) A game that builds characters to function under two different systems of varying power across the board and with characters under one system needing to employ part of the other to stay viable in some/any way is bad game design and if those characters built from the different systems are expected to work together when there is massive power creep between the two systems is also bad game design

D&D has two systems that are used to play the game: The weapon combat system and the magic system. For those using the weapon combat system, they need to delve into the magical items part of the magic system to stay viable in the game. The difference in power between the systems is like a single soldier with a gun compared to an aircraft carrier and its task force. This is from level 1 too, not some later level. These are also fundimental game imbalances that result in of the following happening: A) the encounters are designed for those using the weapon combat system meaning that the magic system users will frequently just break or cake-walk the encounters, B) the encounters are designed for those using the magic system meaning those weapon combat systems users may break or cake-walk the encounters or they may be fatally harmed by the encounters and can do nothing to affect them in any way.

5) Everyone needs to contribute all the time

Not everyone needs to be contributing all the time during gameplay. That being said, everyone needs to be able to contribute in some small way if the player chooses to do so. Being completely unable to contribute at all makes the game unfun because no one likes doing nothing for hours on end.

6) The problems only exist because of bad DMs or bad DMing

This is a pet peeve of mine because it essentially insults everyone that is basically not you. Because i see serious game design flaws in D&D, i must be a terrible DM otherwise it wouldn't exist. This is what you are saying everytime the problems are mentioned and people pass them off as being due to bad dming or something.

Nitwits!!! The problems stem from basic game design flaws incorporated into the system, not because i (and all the others falsely blamed) am a crappy dm. Being a good DM just means you are better able to lessen the effect of the bad game design or make it less noticable or less of an issue. Stop lumping everyone who reports or complains about these issues as being bad DMs, its insulting.

As for FR, too much of the book stuff got ported over into the game stuff as lore and it really makes the setting wonky.

[CyberThread]

Wait...but isn't that one of the biggest boons to PC Gaming, is the modding community? In this case Homebrew, or even House rules. Now lets compare to controller based games, where you can't mod, and you are stuck with DLC or whatever updates they may give you.


Yes our game is *decent* but not great, but has hell of allot of options. Then we have "modders" like psyren and dictarious morties or whatever his name is. Take classes that most just shove off and say , WAIT if you use this, this , and this, it makes it sorta playable, and yes they show us also how to break the game but that is not the point.

D&D is a a system that is HIGHLY modifiable and easy to ignore or change things as you see fit, unlike a video game, unless it is on the PC.


The true strength of a large setting like Forgotten realms, is that it gives you a huge tool box, and tons of published lore and books, but you can freely modify it as you see fit, modding your own game to make it better or worse.

[jedipotter]

in a 3.5 context, how much of a heavy upgrade would they need to actually hold up to lore for melee combat*without them being gish*

What does ''hold up to the lore'' mean? It is safe to say that most of the famous fighter types can sure win most of the fights they get in. Drizzt, for example, can and does mow down goblins, duegar, and giants. The same is true for Wufgar, or King Arzon. Entreri is sure to win just about any ''street fight''.

It does not take ''game abilities'' to do things....this is 3E/4E propaganda. You do not have to have a class ability that says ''you can do X''. You can challenge a god with out the Challenge God(Ex) ability.

[CyberThread]

I mean overall not just FR but D&D period, how much of a heavy upgrade would Melee need without turning magical to put a melee user on par of a magic user.


Drizzit and the like, also have plot armor, and decently powerful allies/items.

[jedipotter]

Well, most fictional characters have plot armor.


It is hard to compare ''game'' to a ''fantasy setting''. Game wise a player can say ''oh I eat bread and water and then do (whatever)'' or ''I attack and teleport and rest and attack and teleport and...''. It is easy to say, sitting at a table drinking a Mt. Dew. But to 'really' do so would not work out so well...

[CRtwenty]

I mean overall not just FR but D&D period, how much of a heavy upgrade would Melee need without turning magical to put a melee user on par of a magic user.


Drizzit and the like, also have plot armor, and decently powerful allies/items.

It'd essentially need an entire rewrite of each class from the ground up, and possibly a rewrite of the whole magic system.

See 4th Ed for an example. And we all know how many people feel about that. :smallamused:

[CyberThread]

HEy you fixed it!!! I hate it!! Give me back my ! I want to feel like a leet genius for finding loopholes and cool combos!

[magwaaf]

i myself love faerun. i've been reading the books and stuff since 2nd ed. our current faerun game has been going on for 2 years and its been fantastic.

here's the problem you guys are having.

its been stated that the FR books are to be used with the core 3.0 books and the FR books only

[magwaaf]

The Chosen are also running around with artifacts, such as Khelben's staff and Elminster's... everything, I think. And the stats on those tend to be whatever the plot needs them to be, so their actual builds may be irrelevant.

But I did mention in the second half of my statement that the baddies spend too much time fighting each other. Manshoon is Zhentarim, Szass is a Red - they already hate each other's guts. If one of them went on the offensive, it would pretty much be a tossup whether the Chosen or the other one would screw him first.

to be fair, elminster's sword isn't an artifact. it's just a +5 keen thundering longsword, nothing exceptionally op

[magwaaf]

{Scrubbed}

[AuraTwilight]

its not just about power gaming. granted that is the only way 99% of you people play this game so that statement is irrelevant.


Yea, you really look reasonable when you attack everyone on this forum over a single person's comment. Love you too, buddy.

[magwaaf]

never claimed to be reasonable! :smallbiggrin:

but i'm still right

[ryu]

There's a difference between not powergaming and gimping your build so hard that a caster over level 30 can be easily killed a 17th level wizard who isn't even utilizing the cheesier side of high op tricks.

[Alleran]

so what you are saying is that you have not read anything about the characters.
Ahem. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15774610&postcount=47)

{scrubbed}

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: Please keep it civil in here.

[AuraTwilight]

never claimed to be reasonable! :smallbiggrin:

but i'm still right

Then prove it. Your correctness will be demonstrated by the quality of your points and arguments, not by degenerating other people and their points. Be constructive or begone.

On-Topic: Not only does Forgottem Realms add content from novels intended for storylines with no attention to balance, but it had 'epic' content before formulated Epic rules (as shoddy as they might be) so all and all the whole thing's kind of a clusterbomb if you try to get involved in the higher metaplot.

And if you don't want to get involved in the metaplot, then why is it there? As soon as you interact with it, your interpretation of the setting will veer off into it's own continuity, and future installments will become less and less usable and relevant at your table. Otherwise, you have to make the metaplot retcon what you've done before and take precedence over your PCs.

The Forgotten Realms is a good setting for novels, but a poor one for gaming in. Old World of Darkness basically should've taught the industry that progressing metaplots in tabletop games are bad.

[Petrocorus]

And if you don't want to get involved in the metaplot, then why is it there? As soon as you interact with it, your interpretation of the setting will veer off into it's own continuity, and future installments will become less and less usable and relevant at your table. Otherwise, you have to make the metaplot retcon what you've done before and take precedence over your PCs.

I had a problem with this with Lo5R. The "stotyline" of the card game imported into the RPG made me sick. As a DM, i decided to ignore it completely.



The Forgotten Realms is a good setting for novels, but a poor one for gaming in. Old World of Darkness basically should've taught the industry that progressing metaplots in tabletop games are bad.

I don't recall having problem with oWoD about this. What story are you referring to?

[jedipotter]

And if you don't want to get involved in the metaplot, then why is it there? As soon as you interact with it, your interpretation of the setting will veer off into it's own continuity, and future installments will become less and less usable and relevant at your table. Otherwise, you have to make the metaplot retcon what you've done before and take precedence over your PCs.

Well, FR has more like several dozen metaplots. The metaplots are there to give the world some background and story to it. As opposed to settings like Ebberon, where the world stops and waits for the PC's to do something. Just as a polt is there, does not say it must be used. After all most games have lots of plots, but the players only do one.

It is true, that if you game in the Realms for a while, your home game will not match the printed game books. If that matters to someone?

[Psyren]

This is straying from the topic of FR, but the main theme that ties this all back to Forgotten Realms is simply that they wanted a setting that was fantastic, yet whose narrative was consistent with the game rules. By tying "Magic A is Magic A" to both game and plot, they would be handing us all the tools we needed to recreate every story from the books, or make our own using theirs as a springboard. Faerun, like Greyhawk before it and Eberron after, is a magocracy - as any high-magic setting would logically become eventually.

Concerning D&D itself...


You all (others) seem to operating on the erronous concepts:

1) D&D is a team game.
Sorry, but if this was true, then the designers would have gone to more effort to make it function better like this. In the football example, the quarterback needs that line backer or he gets tackled and brought down. The line backer's job of guarding the quarterback makes the quarterback able to do his/her job. Without that line backer, it is harder for the quarterback to do his/her job. It is similiar in other team sports.

D&D is not a team sport though. If the quarterback(wizard) is missing his/her line backer(fighter), it makes no difference because the wizard can still work.

The wizard can work alone, yes of course. But it is still harder for him to do so without a meatshield than with one. Going back to the football analogy, the faster and more skilled your quarterback is, the less he needs an offensive line. The quarterback, like the wizard, has the potential of succeeding entirely on his own (or at least being the deciding factor), where scoring a touchdown in this case means overcoming the encounter. But the big difference between D&D and football is that in D&D, neither the capabilities of the players nor the challenge they have to overcome is fixed. Both are overseen by the system and the DM.

That is how D&D was crafted - the casters were designed such that they could function alone, provided they had the necessary levels of power, preparation and skill. The less of those three qualities they have, the more they need an offensive line, the melee.

Now, where I fully agree that 3.5 dropped the ball (no pun intended) was in letting the wizard (quarterback) be just as effective on the offensive line for very little investment. A single spell replaces all his physical stats, and the time/resource investment required to conjure blockers out of thin air was gradually eroded with PrCs like Malconvoker and various metamagic reducers. This is of course one of the reasons I run Pathfinder rules instead, because it gives me a clear reason to allow or disallow any 3.5 material I consider detrimental to the group's fun. Things like Incantatrix or Dweomerkeeper - both of which are Faerun PrCs, you'll note - are likely to not make the cut or be heavily modified, while things like Red Wizard (again, a FR PrC) will very likely not be available to PCs.



Teams function by having the different members contribute their unique skills and make the party/team stronger. That applies for team sports and military events, and a few others, but not D&D ever.

D&D does not possess unique areas/skills for anything than other T1-T3/T4s. The others have their stuff duplicated or replaced better by something better.

This is not true at all. Relying on spells to fill a party member's role has unique drawbacks - the most key of which are dispellability, detectability, and duration - that make doing so not better than just having a melee in every circumstance. The DM's job is to challenge the players, and that necessitates that he or she exploit those weaknesses periodically.

I recall a fantasy novel (whose name escapes me) where an apprentice wizard asks his wise master why the tower of magi hired laborers to build the wall around their grounds, when they could simply have erected their structures by magic. The master pointed out that sheltering behind a wall that could be unravelled by the mages of a rival town would be folly. Better instead to build a physical/mundane wall the slow way, and reinforce it with magic - that way, if their spells were ever removed, the wall (being real) would remain. That is the principle at play in D&D - you can summon a wall (meatshield) between you and the enemy, but the wiser course of action is to get a mundane wall and put magic on top of it instead.



Nor does the game by design encourage team building or teamwork at the expense of lone wolves. Have a poorly coordinated team is not suffering any worse than a highly coordinated team nor is there anything better happening for the highly coordinated team versus the poorly coordinated team.

This is the hallmark of an inexperienced or unsuitable DM. Go and read DM journals by SilverClawShift or Saph, and see what happens to parties that don't use teamwork.

If you are a less savvy DM, you can instead use houserules to cover the gap as a last resort. If something is troublesome and too much effort to counter, just ban it - problem solved.



For those with delusions, playing a character that appears to suck while looking at everything the wizard is doing starts to become unfun. this is even for when the wizard is trying not to overshadow the other classes. No matter how much you can try to, you will not forget/notice the fact the wizard could simply do more cool things than you. When you get to levels where the wizard is just ending encounters with spells and the like, it starts to make the weaker classes/players feel unuseful or excess baggage.

If the wizard is "ending encounters with spells" the fault lies with the encounter, not the wizard. The DM knows exactly what the wizard is preparing, what he likes to cast and where the fights will happen; furthermore, the DM has spellcasters of his own. if you can't challenge someone with all of those tools, then I agree, you're better off playing something else.



the weapon combat system is considerably far weaken than the magic combat system. At the start, at level 1, a fighter is not that much better than a wizard and is less better than a cleric/druid. At level 5, a fighter is significantly less better than a wizard, and is out of league with a cleric/druid. at level 10, a fighter is out of league with a wizard, and is the comic relief to a cleric/druid. This imbalance is built directly into the system and frequently rears its head.

Expecting swinging a pointy stick around to be equal to magic - especially in Faerun, a very high-magic setting - just isn't realistic. The hallmark of magic is that it can do anything - if things that are not magic (or psionics etc.) are equally capable, then they are functionally magic no matter what you call them.



3) The gentleman's agreement nullifies bad game design

Any game that relies on something made by the game's players/users to remove or lessen an effect by the game's design is piss poor game design. It relies solely on people who are either mature or decent enough to employ it and if the players are not mature enough or decent enough, then they just won't use it.

Why would you ever play games with people who aren't mature or decent? :smallconfused:

But even if this is the case, then yes, there are plenty of other games out there that can rein in the... baser tendencies such people would have. It seems to me that other problems would pop up down the line with such people however regardless of system.



4) A game that builds characters to function under two different systems of varying power across the board and with characters under one system needing to employ part of the other to stay viable in some/any way is bad game design and if those characters built from the different systems are expected to work together when there is massive power creep between the two systems is also bad game design

D&D has two systems that are used to play the game: The weapon combat system and the magic system. For those using the weapon combat system, they need to delve into the magical items part of the magic system to stay viable in the game.

Going back to "Magic A is Magic A" - it doesn't make sense in any D&D world to be able to take on a dragon, or a ghost, or a demon, without magic of some kind (even in the form of items.) The rules are merely a reflection of that paradigm, a way to again recreate any narrative from the setting within the game (or all new conflicts.)



5) Everyone needs to contribute all the time

Not everyone needs to be contributing all the time during gameplay. That being said, everyone needs to be able to contribute in some small way if the player chooses to do so. Being completely unable to contribute at all makes the game unfun because no one likes doing nothing for hours on end.

There is not a single class in D&D that is "unable to contribute at all." If that is happening at your tables, the fault lies with the encounters, not the classes. Fighters are designed to deal hit point damage, and hit points are something every single monster in the game has.

Now, if what you're saying is that the player may get bored playing a simpler class - the easy solution there is to let them reroll. But it's often a good idea to sit with the player before the campaign even starts and ask what they plan on getting out of the character and whether the playstyle appeals to them. Players who just want to roll dice and swing swords won't mind if all they are doing is rolling dice and swinging swords. For those who want more, there are classes that offer more; not all classes can be all things to all people.



6) The problems only exist because of bad DMs or bad DMing

This is a pet peeve of mine because it essentially insults everyone that is basically not you. Because i see serious game design flaws in D&D, i must be a terrible DM otherwise it wouldn't exist. This is what you are saying everytime the problems are mentioned and people pass them off as being due to bad dming or something.

Nitwits!!! The problems stem from basic game design flaws incorporated into the system, not because i (and all the others falsely blamed) am a crappy dm.

Being a good DM just means you are better able to lessen the effect of the bad game design or make it less noticable or less of an issue. Stop lumping everyone who reports or complains about these issues as being bad DMs, its insulting.

1) Surely you see the irony here - complaining about feeling insulted in one breath, while calling others nitwits in the same statement. :smalltongue:

2) If I've given offense then I apologize as that was not my intent. I merely want to convey the inalienable fact that the DM has total control over the campaign; if the players are bored or not challenged, the DM has all the tools necessary to rectify that situation. If someone has the tools to solve a problem and still cannot solve that problem, surely you can agree that perhaps that person is unsuited for the role?

[AuraTwilight]

I don't recall having problem with oWoD about this. What story are you referring to?

oWoD had a severe problem with Creator's Pet Too-Cool-For-You NPCs coming down and trying to shut your PCs from shaking up the big-game status quo or really mattering beyond a local level, and if you killed one of those jerks or changed them from the printed status quo, then the later books became less and less relevant. Oh yea, cool, the End of the World final books were cool....unless you had killed certain NPCs earlier.

[russdm]

So are you saying I am unsuitable as a DM because several of my players are major power-gamers and make it their goal to employ the Tier system to full effect with no regard for what that does to the game?

[ryu]

If everyone is tier one just present tier one challenges. It's when groups are on different individual levels that problems happen.

[Psyren]

So are you saying I am unsuitable as a DM because several of my players are major power-gamers and make it their goal to employ the Tier system to full effect with no regard for what that does to the game?

If everyone is still having fun (including you) then you're doing fine. But if their lack of regard for the game is impacting the enjoyment of anyone at the table and you don't do anything about it, then yes. The DM has ultimate power, and with great power etc.

[AuraTwilight]

So are you saying I am unsuitable as a DM because several of my players are major power-gamers and make it their goal to employ the Tier system to full effect with no regard for what that does to the game?

What does this even mean in relations to anyone else's comments? I don't follow.

[russdm]

You are not the only one that doesn't.

[AuraTwilight]

Well, you're the one who said it. Mind clarifying?

[Melcar]

Nobody has a problem with classes that are simply powerful.
The FR PrCs that people complain about go far beyond powerful and right into "break the game with minimal effort" territory at most tables.

Circle Magic is simply ridicolous if you use it anywhere near its potential. There's no way around that.
Hathran takes it a step further with spontaneus casting of any spell known and the fact that it requires Leadership, arguably one of the most broken feats in the game.

The same goes for Incantatrix's "persist any spell you want" power.
The system simply doesn't hold up at those levels of power without an experienced DM and lots of gentlemens agreements and houseruling and that's why people call it broken.


I have played in FR for 13 years now, on the same character, now a level 30 wizard. We have never had to make any gentlemen agreements nor had to ban anything from the setting. Circle magic is not obtainable by anyone, and if you are roleplaying it should be no problem. My mage will never pursue something that Thay uses! It would simple not be something he does. My mage lives in Silverymoon, and though I have not fought any spellguards, I am not convinced that they are broken. And who really care about having mage armor all day, or see invisibility? Persist away, ill disjoin them all.

Also I have got to say, that it sounds like your players are exploiting the rules instead of playing some good old roleplaying, where power gaming is as much fun as a root canal. But I could be wrong ofc!

[sleepyphoenixx]

I have played in FR for 13 years now, on the same character, now a level 30 wizard. We have never had to make any gentlemen agreements nor had to ban anything from the setting. Circle magic is not obtainable by anyone, and if you are roleplaying it should be no problem. My mage will never pursue something that Thay uses! It would simple not be something he does. My mage lives in Silverymoon, and though I have not fought any spellguards, I am not convinced that they are broken. And who really care about having mage armor all day, or see invisibility? Persist away, ill disjoin them all.

Also I have got to say, that it sounds like your players are exploiting the rules instead of playing some good old roleplaying, where power gaming is as much fun as a root canal. But I could be wrong ofc!

Just because you're not using it doesn't mean it's not there.

[Max Caysey]

I don't have the statblocks in front of me, but IIRC, both Manshoon and Szass Tam (who were statted up in the ELH) should have more than enough firepower to tear apart any one of the Chosen short of the Simbul (only because she has Epic Spellcasting - otherwise, she's almost as bad as Storm). Manshoon is something like a 25th level caster (Wizard 20 / Archmage 5), and Szass is a CR 31-ish Lich Necromancer with the full gamut of Red Wizard levels, so their builds, while not exactly amazing (they don't dip into things like Incantatrix), aren't exactly weak - it's full wizard casting. There's also that evil-aligned disciple of Auril in the book who has Epic Spellcasting.

The Chosen, by contrast, are laughably bad, far worse than their opponents. Alustriel has two or three sorcerer levels that do absolutely nothing for her, Storm is some bizarre mix of Rogue, Fighter, Sorcerer, Bard and Harper Agent that makes no sense, the Simbul might have Epic Spellcasting but is left with 20 Sorcerer levels and ten levels of Wizard because I don't know, maybe the person in charge of the statblock was drunk or high at the time (and she has at-will supernatural Shapechange because of wish spells and magical experimentation on herself...). She's supposed to canonically have more raw power even than Elminster. Laeral is statted up in City of Splendours, and she sucks. She's got 19th level wizard casting strapped on to about seven or eight levels in Ranger.

Khelben is Wizard with some Archmage. He's probably the best-built, which isn't saying much. Elminster has the most levels (35!), but they're also terrible. Two in Rogue? If he wanted evasion, he just needed to fork out 25k gold. Three in Cleric? If he was going for Initiate of Mystra, he obviously forgot to get it. Fighter... why? He might have his 29 Wizard and Archmage levels, but I'd give good odds to Szass any day in terms of mechanics.

In a one-on-one, they pretty much need their fancy Chosen of Mystra template (which is largely defensive instead of offensive) just to compete. When I was browsing it I did notice something about the silver fire. Once every 70 minutes, 4d12 damage, DC 23 Reflex half, 70 foot range. Pretty terrible, but the description also states that it will automatically overcome magical barriers and spell resistance. Just what qualifies as a "magical barrier" isn't stated, so it might come in handy as a start-of-battle debuff, depending on how it's read.

Other than that, though? About the only thing keeping them in the game is that most of them work together, so if you mess with one of them then half a dozen others are likely to come down on your head, plus all their buddies from organisations they founded (e.g. Harpers).

Elminster is build like that because of his background. He started as a kid, as a mercenary, hence the level 1 fighter, after that became friends with a thief and started stealing, hence the level 2 rogue, and while stealing from a Mystra temple he was aproached by Mystra that asked him if he wanted power, he agreed, and was sent into the forrest to live with an elven cleric, and trained as one. Hence the 3 levels of cleric. This is based on the novels, not powergaming optimization!

[Lafaellar]

I tend to pretty much ignore the builds the book when it comes to Forgotten Realms NPC.
You must keep in mind that these characters have an unfair task set for them.
They where crafted with a strong story background they have to fulfil and they where designed with a certain amount of books that where out to this point.
Hell, most of them are even 3.0 and not 3.5 and with every book release a new power level was set. For example, Initiate of Mystra wasn't even there when Elminster was written into the FRCS.
So you have to be fair and I think it is fully appropriate to build these characters with the new rules available if you think it better fits them.
It's the stories that make these characters what they are, not the rules presented for them in the book.

In the stories, they also don't seem to give much about the rules of the system anyway.

So personally, I don't care about the builds for these characters IF I want to use them in my campaign, which I most of the time try to avoid because it is really difficult to roleplay a character that appears in a plethora of books your whole table has read in a way that all of them agree with.

[Alleran]

Elminster is build like that because of his background. He started as a kid, as a mercenary, hence the level 1 fighter, after that became friends with a thief and started stealing, hence the level 2 rogue, and while stealing from a Mystra temple he was aproached by Mystra that asked him if he wanted power, he agreed, and was sent into the forrest to live with an elven cleric, and trained as one. Hence the 3 levels of cleric. This is based on the novels, not powergaming optimization!
I noted these issues. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15774610&postcount=47) For a build based on the novels, he doesn't do an amazing job of sticking to what he's capable of in said novels.

Frankly, if statblocks had to be written, all that was needed was something on the order of this:

- Elminster (male chaotic good human 29th level mage Chosen of Mystra)

Add a few short sentences (maybe a paragraph or two if you're picky) on his character and some of his history. Leave the rest up to the GM to build as he or she likes.

[TuggyNE]

I have played in FR for 13 years now, on the same character, now a level 30 wizard. We have never had to make any gentlemen agreements nor had to ban anything from the setting.

Huh, curious, I'd think you'd at least have an implicit …


Circle magic is not obtainable by anyone, and if you are roleplaying it should be no problem.
[…]
Also I have got to say, that it sounds like your players are exploiting the rules instead of playing some good old roleplaying, where power gaming is as much fun as a root canal. But I could be wrong ofc!

… ah, there we go. Yes, you really do have a gentlemen's agreement, and what's more, one where certain in-setting and rules-available abilities are considered off-limits. (Also, can we get some Stormwind over here? Thanks.)

Mind you, I'm glad your game goes well, but it's best if you understand the actual reasons for that, if possible, especially if you're advising others on how to have good games as well.

[Feytalist]

I noted these issues. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15774610&postcount=47) For a build based on the novels, he doesn't do an amazing job of sticking to what he's capable of in said novels.

Frankly, if statblocks had to be written, all that was needed was something on the order of this:

- Elminster (male chaotic good human 29th level mage Chosen of Mystra)

Add a few short sentences (maybe a paragraph or two if you're picky) on his character and some of his history. Leave the rest up to the GM to build as he or she likes.

Yup, that's what FR did pre-3.X. 3rd ed had this weird compulsion to stat all the things, slightly to its detriment, I personally think. Transfer the onus onto the DM, to adapt to his own campaign. Oh well, our DM did that anyway.

[Melcar]

Huh, curious, I'd think you'd at least have an implicit …



… ah, there we go. Yes, you really do have a gentlemen's agreement, and what's more, one where certain in-setting and rules-available abilities are considered off-limits. (Also, can we get some Stormwind over here? Thanks.)

Mind you, I'm glad your game goes well, but it's best if you understand the actual reasons for that, if possible, especially if you're advising others on how to have good games as well.

I would never asume to know or tell anyone how they should play the game. If I came off that way I apologize. As long as everybody is having fun, then that is the right way for them to play.

I was merely trying to say, that to me, rules might be rules, but if it didn't fit the roleplaying and concept of character, it would be off limits. Not because of a direct ban, but from a "what would your character really do or think in game" ban... of sorts!

[Psyren]

I noted these issues. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15774610&postcount=47) For a build based on the novels, he doesn't do an amazing job of sticking to what he's capable of in said novels.

Frankly, if statblocks had to be written, all that was needed was something on the order of this:

- Elminster (male chaotic good human 29th level mage Chosen of Mystra)

Add a few short sentences (maybe a paragraph or two if you're picky) on his character and some of his history. Leave the rest up to the GM to build as he or she likes.

His build could be easily cleaned up if they used the retraining rules. Started as a mercenary blah blah blah retrain to Wizard. (Granted, PHB2 came out way, way after FRCS.)


I would never asume to know or tell anyone how they should play the game. If I came off that way I apologize. As long as everybody is having fun, then that is the right way for them to play.

I was merely trying to say, that to me, rules might be rules, but if it didn't fit the roleplaying and concept of character, it would be off limits. Not because of a direct ban, but from a "what would your character really do or think in game" ban... of sorts!

There's nothing wrong with that, but the guy you were responding to said those classes are a problem because they need gentleman's agreements and houserules in order to work. Your response sounded like "There's nothing wrong with those classes. We use gentleman's agreements and houserules and they work fine!"