What Ancient build, did you use to think was overpowered?

[CyberThread]

Am talking like 2004,2002 era, what old character builds or suggestions back in those lovely forum days, did you actually think was overpowered?

[Forrestfire]

... Does it count if we thought wizards were OP? :smallwink:

Although more seriously, back when I started I thought a TWF rogue was the most ridiculous thing ever. "So many attacks and so much damage if they hit, which they totally will, right? I took weapon focus!"

[Waker]

I remember back when, thinking that gestalt Fighter/Monk was powerful. Full BAB, all Good saves, d10 HD, big unarmed damage etc.
Of course back then I also bought into the bold-faced lie that Bards were bad.

[MinMax Hardcore]

Of course back then I also bought into the bold-faced lie that Bards were bad.

Explain this part? I always thought barbs where spoony.

[eggynack]

Explain this part? I always thought barbs where spoony.
Bards are quite good. In core, they have reasonably powerful casting, good skill use, decent fighting ability, and inspire courage. Honestly, you could simplify that down to the casting and the skills, and that would probably be enough. Anyways, out of core you get even more spells, inspire courage optimization through the roof, some cool tricks like dragonfire inspiration (distinct from purely numeric IC optimization) and snowflake wardance, and the ability to go sublime chord for double even more casting. They're a tier three class, and the fifth best class in core, after the sorcerer.

[Waker]

eggynack summed it up quite nicely. If you are playing as a Bard and you can't find a way to contribute to some situation, you simply aren't thinking hard enough.

[Der_DWSage]

I once rolled a phenomenal set of stats-there were 3 18s, and I believe the rest were no lower than 14-and I figured that with stats like that, I should have no problem playing the MAD Monk.

I rather quickly learned the error of my ways, but I still thought a Monk with 18 Strength, 18 Dexterity, and 18 Wisdom would have no issues whatsoever, and would be 'so overpowered.'

Aside from that? Early on, I felt that Warlocks got too much damage for what they did. I mean, they get as much as Sneak Attack! Every hit!

[ArcturusV]

Back in the early days of the edition, and long before I ran into any boards like this?

Groups I was in used to think Sorcerers were godawful overpowered due to having more spells per day than Clerics or Wizards. Limited spells known? Pssh, who cares, just pick the best ones anyway, then laugh as you cast like 3 times as many spells as a Wizard!

People thinking Monk was OP. Which was based on the logic of, what do you get as a Capstone? Barb? I can rage for some small stat buffs a bunch. Fighter: I know feats. Bard: I sing at people, etc, but Monk was "I become a freakin' outsider!" Somehow that never really worked out for people, possibly because I never took campaigns up that high.

The fact that we could play Rangers and Paladins without needing God Stat Rolls. Coming off 2nd edition where you needed (Among other high-ish stats) a base 17 Charisma to be a Paladin... eeesh. Also thinking how "broken" it was that humans could multiclass freely, and how racial limits were broken "What, I can play an Elf Paladin? And I don't need a 17 Charisma?! HELL YEAH! And my Human can be a Thief/Fighter/Cleric?!". Oh, and 4d6b3 being standard stat generation as well, thought it was OP as hell. Or that we could cast Haste without aging ourselves 10 years at a time.

[Ranting Fool]

I once rolled a phenomenal set of stats-there were 3 18s, and I believe the rest were no lower than 14-and I figured that with stats like that, I should have no problem playing the MAD Monk.

I rather quickly learned the error of my ways, but I still thought a Monk with 18 Strength, 18 Dexterity, and 18 Wisdom would have no issues whatsoever, and would be 'so overpowered.'


This! One of my players rolled stats like that (back when we rolled, now they all love point buys) and everyone was like "oh no he's just going to crush all the encounters" :smallbiggrin:

I used to think a straight Barbarian with pimped out strength and a great sword + power attack was overpowered (This was long before I came across things like leap attack:smallbiggrin:) but then that was when all wizards did was chuck a random fireball or two.

[Korahir]

Barbarian1/fighter2/ranger2/rogue1. Those were the days. :P

[Chronos]

Quoth ArcturusV:

The fact that we could play Rangers and Paladins without needing God Stat Rolls. Coming off 2nd edition where you needed (Among other high-ish stats) a base 17 Charisma to be a Paladin... eeesh. Also thinking how "broken" it was that humans could multiclass freely, and how racial limits were broken "What, I can play an Elf Paladin? And I don't need a 17 Charisma?! HELL YEAH!
One of the sample characters they were teasing before 3e was released was a half-orc paladin. OK, I got that half-orcs were a standard race now, and that they had removed the racial restrictions on classes, but that's still not possible! How is a half-orc going to get a 17 Cha!?

[Akal Saris]

Hmm. I was a DM for most of the time before 2008 or so, but I thought that the tattooed monk PC was ridiculously strong because he had so many special abilities to use. The cleric/radiant servant of pelor was ridiculous too, but I still think that :P

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Hexblade 4/ Talon of Tiamat 10
This was shortly after the Draconomicon was printed, so about the first half of 2004. Between one-shotting encounters with a Maximized Clinging cone of acid or line of lightning or cone of fire, decent BAB, HP, and base saves, enough of the right skills to dominate social encounters, plus utility spells from Hexblade, it was an extremely fun build without being overpowered.

Once Complete Adventurer was printed in 2005 the build changed to Hexblade 3/ Sorcerer 2/ Talon of Tiamat 10/ Spellsword 5. Between Power Attack plus Wraithstrike and being able to use Channel Spell with Cloudkill at level 20, my group thought it was downright amazing.

[graeylin]

Having been playing since 1977 or so, I take umbrage at the idea that 2003 or so is "ancient"...

[lsfreak]

The group who I first played D&D with, back in 2004-ish, really thought monks were broken. Why? Because they got more attacks per round than the gods.

[Libertad]

Count me as one of the guys who thought that Monks were overpowered. I also thought the Drizz't stat block in 3E Forgotten Realms was super-powerful. In reality he's not very tough or versatile for an ECL 18 NPC.

[Venusaur]

Having been playing since 1977 or so, I take umbrage at the idea that 2003 or so is "ancient"...

Well, it's ancient in terms of D&D 3/3.5E

[Toy Killer]

I remember ramping up encounter difficulty when someone added a monk to the party.

Now I berate people that say fighters are OP. GITP!? What have you done to me?

:smalltongue:

[Amphetryon]

Once upon a time, this was me:

Rogue/Sorcerer: ZOMG Touch Attack + Sneak Attack! Teh horror!

[Chronos]

I do remember when I suddenly realized that rangers literally got everything monks got and then some... And that was in 3.0, before rangers got improved.

[MinMax Hardcore]

Back when I played 3.5e in 2006, I thought my paladin was OP.
My paladin can spirit charge plus smite, while on a flying mount
at lv 7. Also still got my special warhorse to help me.
Controlling 1 PC and 2 Mounts, how cool is that?

I actually had a DM to ask me to send one of my mounts
as I overthrown the balance for the encounter.

I also had an argument with the DM that a horse can grapple.
I told him if he want to see an online video of a horse grappling. :smallbiggrin:

[CyberThread]

http://i.stack.imgur.com/9ZJEs.png

[johnbragg]

Not a PC build, but Vampire wizards with monk levels. In one campaign, they were everywhere. It taught me to expect all my casters' targets to make every saving throw.

[Ifni]

I thought shadowcraft gnomes were overpowered when Races of Stone came out in 2004, and I was right :smalltongue:

I did think bards were weak, but to be fair, this was in an environment where:
-Everyone started at L1 and XP gains were slow; if you played everything available you might get to L7 in a RL year, but L4-5ish was more common.
-Nothing was allowed outside Core.
-There were typically three encounters at EL = party level +1-3 per day.
-Most opponents tended to be monsters rather than humans, and undead were really common.
-There was a "diplomancy results are based on GM discretion" rule.

I maintain that bards are weak at those levels and that environment: at L1, +1 inspire courage once/day and spellcasting = cantrips does not a solid contributor make. (Fascinate is fine, but at that level your Perform check isn't amazing yet, and it's also not an ability that works in combat.) At L3, you have a mighty two L1 spells/day (assuming non-hideous Cha), plus your bardsong. You don't have Inspirational Boost and Song of the Heart and cheap MIC items and masterwork instruments to make your bardsong a thing of terror even in the baby levels: you have +1 bardsong, and it's not getting better until L8. They were right up there with monks as "classes where we try to make sure no group has more than one, for an RPGA module, unless it's meant to be very easy".

Later material was really nice to bards. Not so much to monks.

[MinMax Hardcore]

http://i.stack.imgur.com/9ZJEs.png

Explain that to the DMs. Everytime I try to grapple with my
special heavy warhorse, they told horses can't grapple because
they have hooves. EVERY SINGLE DM!

It's really hard to keep the D&D sesssion rated PG when
they ask me how my heavy warhorse grapple them.

[Rubik]

Explain that to the DMs. Everytime I try to grapple with my
special heavy warhorse, they told horses can't grapple because
they have hooves. EVERY SINGLE DM!

It's really hard to keep the D&D sesssion rated PG when
they ask me how my heavy warhorse grapple them.Have you ever been knocked down and stood on by a horse?

Not fun.

[Averis Vol]

Have you ever been knocked down and stood on by a horse?

Not fun.

Can't imagine it was comfortable.

As for me, I started in 2008 and MY first build was so mad OP my DM hard focused me every time.

I was a crit fishing (falchion) rogue 3/fighter 6 at the start with a higher to hit and damage output then their previous badass: the straight fighter 9.

Part of it was because we ruled walls counted as flank, and I crit so often that my frost/shocking burst falchion was actually worth it. Pair the two and I carried most encounters until the cleric (didnt know it at the time) went CoDzilla on us.

[Beardbarian]

I used to think that sword and shield fighter was OP for the high AC, HP, hit and damage.

Later, when i started to learn some building stuff, my DM said "what is more powerful than doing damage?" and my face was like -> :smalleek:

[Greenish]

I also thought the Drizz't stat block in 3E Forgotten Realms was super-powerful. In reality he's not very tough or versatile for an ECL 18 NPC.Isn't he ECL 20 (thanks to LA)?


I remember plotting how powerful a fighter with Weapon Focus chain TWFing bastard swords would be when I first got my hands on PHB.

[Piggy Knowles]

Have you ever been knocked down and stood on by a horse?

Not fun.

As someone who has been bitten by horse on more than one occassion, I'm mostly appalled that they don't have a bite attack listed in their stat block...

[graeylin]

As someone who has been bitten by horse on more than one occassion, I'm mostly appalled that they don't have a bite attack listed in their stat block...
Amen... grabbing me with a hoof? Not likely. Taking a chunk of flesh the size of a softball out of my arm? Oh yeah, they do that.

[Darrin]

It's really hard to keep the D&D sesssion rated PG when
they ask me how my heavy warhorse grapple them.

Kinda expensive.



MULE
Large Animal
Hit Dice: 3d8+9 (22 hp)
Initiative: +1
Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares)
Armor Class: 13 (–1 size, +1 Dex, +3 natural), touch 10, flat-footed 12
Base Attack/Grapple: +2/+9


400 GP = Heavy warhorse.
400 GP = 50 mules (8 GP each).

Of course, that just reminds me of the Doomsday Pack from KODT. The PCs figured out that dogs were ridiculously cheap, breed quickly, and are nearly invincible when they attack using the mass combat rules. The pack gets so out of hand it completely wipes out nearly every living thing in the campaign world, and B.A. has to restart the campaign several hundred years later.

[MinMax Hardcore]

Kinda expensive.

The heavy warhorse was free since it was a paladin special mount.
Since it gain HD and Str, it also gain enough HD for feats.
The only money I spent on it was armor and it had a better AC
than me.

[limejuicepowder]

My first 3 ed character was a DMPC half-orc barb (I was playing with my gf so extra characters were needed). His starting stats were 18 15 14 8 8 8...and he took ambidexterity at first level because I didn't like him having a favored hand.

Around level 5 or so he got a magic fire sword that added +2 fire damage. A few sessions later he accidentally hit a wall while raging and broke it because as the DM I though he was kicking too much ass. He then switch to fighting with spiked gauntlets (and he got to use his ambidexterity feat!).

This campaign lasted until 10th. I don't think me or my gf ever thought he was OP per say, but we did think he kicked all kinds of ass.

[Invader]

I remember reading VoP and thinking OMG SO MANY BONUSES, THIS IS AWESOME!