3.5 Core tiers

[Doonesman]

So, following discussion in my group, I've come here to get the experts' opinion.

While the generally accepted tiers make sense, how do they apply to characters restricted tightly to the Player's Handbook? Is the power of wizards reduced when they're held to the spells in Chapter 11? Do paladins get relatively more effective when their only real competion in the divine-servant arena is the cleric?

Basically, I'm looking to create an effective and efficient character to play in a campaign myself and another experienced player are using to introduce three people to D&D, and we've agreed (he's the DM) that my character will have to be pretty tough to back up/cover for the new guys. Any suggestions or advice?

[Gnaeus]

No difference at all. Most of the most broken spells in the game are in core. If anything, going non core helps the tier imbalance, because (for example) fighters actually have enough good feats to choose, and paladins and rangers can get good spells from spell compendium.

[eggynack]

The tiers become even more solidified in a core only environment. Core spells are often borked to high hell, with stuff ranging from entangle to alter self to dispel magic, so wizards, clerics, and druids are very much tier one. By contrast, low tier classes lose a lot of the things that allow them to raise their effective tier, or at least get higher up within the tier in question. Barbarians lose spirit lion totem and shock trooper (as well as wolf totem and whirling frenzy), fighters lose dungeoncrasher and zhentarim soldier, monks lose invisible fist and crazy monk specific items, and the list goes on. Bards lose stuff too, but they stay in tier three based largely on how strong their spell list is. Banning non-core stuff only really serves to unbalance the game further.

[Firechanter]

Most classes retain their Tier Rating in a Core-Only game. The only _big_ exception is the Bard, which drops to T4 or maybe even T5 due to lack of support. You know the cliché of useless Bards that can't do anything properly? That comes from Core Only environments.

Also, the Fighter drops _deep_ into T5, since there simply is no feat support _at all_ for the class beyond level 12. The last feat they get is "another +2 to damage with your primary weapon", and that's it.

Full Casters however remain solidly T1. The most broken spells _are_ in Core. Or in other words, the PHB is probably the most broken book in the whole game.

[sideswipe]

firstly, magic items. are you using none? dmg only? magic item compendium?

secondly, although you have taken away game warping class alterations and some stupidly powerful spells, the wizard still has at least 50% of its game breaking spells. and some of the most powerful are PHB, e.g. gate and wish

the cleric may be less powerful and have none of the cheesy ACF's but it still has access to most of the good cleric spells and most of the powerful ones. e.g. true res and miracle.

most of the best abilities and feats for the paladin are ACF's and although the gap may be lessened between top and lower tiers, its still the same gap proportionally.

think of a rating system. cleric and wizard have 100, bards, rangers and paladins have 50/40, and fighters have say 20.

if you take half of the power away from everything you end up with 50, 25/20 and 10.

the gaps between the classes may have lessened but their proportional power remains the same.

[eggynack]

Most classes retain their Tier Rating in a Core-Only game. The only _big_ exception is the Bard, which drops to T4 or maybe even T5 due to lack of support. You know the cliché of useless Bards that can't do anything properly? That comes from Core Only environments.

I disagree completely. The bard list has absolute gems at every level, and that alone is likely enough for tier three. They get grease and silent image one level after the sorcerer, but then they get alter self at the exact same time, along with stuff like mirror image and invisibility. 3rd level spells offer stuff like dispel magic, haste, and slow, again, one level after the sorcerer. It's just an excellent list, and the bard gets it at a rate that leaves it far ahead of its tier four and five counterparts. The bard also simultaneously gets a solid skill list, a pile of skill points, reasonable class features, an average BAB, and two good saves. Core only bards have their faults, but it's a highly versatile and often powerful class.

[limejuicepowder]

firstly, magic items. are you using none? dmg only? magic item compendium?

secondly, although you have taken away game warping class alterations and some stupidly powerful spells, the wizard still has at least 50% of its game breaking spells. and some of the most powerful are PHB, e.g. gate and wish

the cleric may be less powerful and have none of the cheesy ACF's but it still has access to most of the good cleric spells and most of the powerful ones. e.g. true res and miracle.

most of the best abilities and feats for the paladin are ACF's and although the gap may be lessened between top and lower tiers, its still the same gap proportionally.

think of a rating system. cleric and wizard have 100, bards, rangers and paladins have 50/40, and fighters have say 20.

if you take half of the power away from everything you end up with 50, 25/20 and 10.

the gaps between the classes may have lessened but their proportional power remains the same.


I thik it's worse than that. By going out of core wizards get a moderate boost in power, but the main offenders are still there. Of all classes, wizards get the least increase of power by going outside core. The main thing wizards get are some afc's that help low level power, and some completely borked prestige classes that no one ever gets to play. Druids are in a similar boat - upwards of 90% of their power is core. Clerics probably get the most out of core of the t1's, like cloistered and divine metamagic.

Mundanes on the other hand are completely screwed in core. By 20th even a barb is going to run out of good feats to take - imagine how the poor fighter feels. There's a reason most core mundanes take horizon walker. There is literally nothing better to do then spend six levels on DD once every few rounds and a handful of situational bonuses.

[Eldariel]

Balance is at its worst in Core. Mundanes benefit of multiclassing, casters only of PRCs; Core basically has Ranger/Barbarian/Fighter. Core Feats are, with few exceptions, only good for casters (Craft-feats, Quicken Spell, Extend Spell, Improved Familiar, Augment Summoning & Spell Penetrations are all Core - warriors have Rapid Shot, Power Attack, Spirited Charge, Improved Trip and Combat Reflexes - everyone can benefit of Leadership). This, of course, hurts mundanes since they rely more on feats. Also, mundane skillpoint supply is dreadfully short of having mastery of their own field.

Most of the best spells are Core (outside Core you get Celerity, Ice Assassin, Hide Life, various new Dispels and company as gamechangers but the list pales in comparison with Core). Take the normal gamebreakers: Gate, Wish, Shapechange are all Core spells. The normal level 9 combat spells, Time Stop and Disjunction, are likewise Core. Lower down you have Polymorph, Polymorph Any Object, Wildshape, Blasphemy-line, Simulacrum, Planar Bindings, caster level boosters and that's without even getting into Divinations/Teleportation and good combat spells on each level (Entangle/Color Spray/Silence/Glitterdust/Stinking Cloud/Walls/etc).

[sideswipe]

By going out of core wizards get a moderate boost in power, but the main offenders are still there. Of all classes, wizards get the least increase of power by going outside core. The main thing wizards get are some afc's that help low level power, and some completely borked prestige classes that no one ever gets to play.


I disagree. in core, wizards have to fully prepare all spells and apply any metamagic at the beginning of the day.

when you add outside core, suddenly wizards become spontaneous casters with almost unlimited power.

in core they are heavily restricted as to when they would obtain this power.

[eggynack]

I disagree. in core, wizards have to fully prepare all spells and apply any metamagic at the beginning of the day.

when you add outside core, suddenly wizards become spontaneous casters with almost unlimited power.

in core they are heavily restricted as to when they would obtain this power.
They're certainly different in and out of core, but they're still doing basically the same stuff in core. They're still defeating encounters in a standard action, taking on any challenge in existence, and rewriting reality to their whims. Out of core stuff just lets them do that somewhat more efficiently. Wizards have infinite power in core, and out of core gives them more infinite power, but infinity is infinity.

[Eldariel]

I disagree. in core, wizards have to fully prepare all spells and apply any metamagic at the beginning of the day.

when you add outside core, suddenly wizards become spontaneous casters with almost unlimited power.

in core they are heavily restricted as to when they would obtain this power.

You can still prepare Grease/Color Spray/Sleep/Ray of Enfeeblement and be prepared for basically anything level 1. Spontaneity is awesome but you can live without it just fine.

[limejuicepowder]

I disagree. in core, wizards have to fully prepare all spells and apply any metamagic at the beginning of the day.

when you add outside core, suddenly wizards become spontaneous casters with almost unlimited power.

in core they are heavily restricted as to when they would obtain this power.

The spontaneous part might come from outside core, but the unlimited power part is core. They're going to be spontaneously casting wish, disjunction, and time stop instead of preping wish, disjunction, and time stop. Out of core options streamline it for sure, but the real keystones of their ability stay the same.

Wizards get maybe a 10 or 15% increase in power (prestige classes aside), but
mundanes lose upwards of 50% of their power by staying in core.

[Gwendol]

Tiers are largely unchanged, including bards occupying a lone spot in the middle of the pack. Clerics and druids are still crazy strong, while wizards and sorcerers are perhaps held back a little, at least early on.

[Doonesman]

firstly, magic items. are you using none? dmg only? magic item compendium?




DMG only. "Abuse" of MIC in previous campaigns has soured my DM it pretty irrevocably. He's trying to "keep it simple" for the new guys - I'm trying to find something that'll still be fun to play.

[Eldariel]

DMG only. "Abuse" of MIC in previous campaigns has soured my DM it pretty irrevocably. He's trying to "keep it simple" for the new guys - I'm trying to find something that'll still be fun to play.

Druid, Wizard, Cleric are all awesome out of the box. Sorcerer is annoyingly limited (lacks ways to expand his spell list) but still an arcane caster. Bards, Rogues and the Melee Multiclass (Horizon Walker & al.) can work. Rest I wouldn't bother with; they're more or less strictly worse than any alternatives.

EDIT: And to be clear, Cleric/Druid/Wizard are pretty much the best in Core game. Sorc gets much closer with non-Core material but in Core they're pretty much Wizards with one spell selection option per level. Bard/Rogue/Multiclass are in the Tier 3-4 range depending on how they're deployed, tho Rogue lacking means to overcome Sneak Attack immunity leaves them relying heavily on UMD.

[StreamOfTheSky]

The only tier that might change is Rogues to (high) tier 5.

Use Magic Device is certainly a great "class feature", but it's always going to be heavily dependent on the stuff you can find/buy. Sneak Attack is literally obsolete against 1/3 of the monster manual without splat support to SA un-sneak-attack-able stuff and super easy to snuff out even against foes vulnerable to it (level 1 obscuring mist does the job quite well, even). And without Darkstalker, the stealth skills are utterly pointless. Trapfinding is and always has been a crappy job to have, it's thankless and you put yourself at risk against things that are 4+ CR below what they should be based on the negative effects "because it's a trap, so if it doesn't kill or severely impair you, it'll just get healed off and not matter for the next encounter."
I love Rogue, it's my favorite class in 3E, but they do suffer quite a lot in core.

Bard definitely is still tier 3, though. They're the best caster in the book after the 4 primary casters - all of whom are tier 1-2 - and get buffing and skills on top of that.

[Particle_Man]

Now if you say "Only evocation spells for Wizard/Sorcerers, only "cure" and "remove" spells for clerics, only SNA spells for druids, and only magic weapons, magic armour, magic rings and wondrous items for magic items, we might be getting closer to smooshing the tiers together in core. But even then more would likely have to be done.

[eggynack]

Now if you say "Only evocation spells for Wizard/Sorcerers, only "cure" and "remove" spells for clerics, only SNA spells for druids, and only magic weapons, magic armour, magic rings and wondrous items for magic items, we might be getting closer to smooshing the tiers together in core. But even then more would likely have to be done.
Probably more for the blasting and healing than for the summoning. Summoning is crazy versatile, and that ability alone would probably justify something like a tier two or three class. That's doubly true if the druid still maintains its non-casting class features.

Edit: Although, actually, the evocation school can be pretty versatile at times. An evocation limited wizard would probably hit tier three, on the merits of stuff like contingency, force spells, wind spells, random utility like sending, and so on. Only cure spells is like a healer, so that one would probably be tier five.

[Draz74]

Everyone is weaker in Core-only, so the scale of what each Tier means is altered. But mostly, the classes get weaker by about the same percentage.

Bard is hurt more than most by the change. But it's still Tier 3. It's just a low Tier 3 instead of a super-high-Tier-3.

You can quibble about other changes, like whether the Rogue is better or worse than normal (relative to the other classes), or whether Wizards lose significantly more power than Druids in the change to Core Only. But ... that's just quibbling. Mostly, not much changes.

[Chronos]

What others are saying is mostly true, but I'll add one addendum. Not all games are core-only or all-books, and in some of the middle ground, the gap between casters and noncasters can grow dramatically. Some DMs will allow something like "Core for everyone, plus one additional book for each character". This does very little for mundane characters, since the good mundane options are scattered here and there across the books: A skillmonkey, for instance, would be able to choose one and only one out of skill tricks, Darkstalker, or Craven, and choosing Darkstalker or Craven means almost nothing else of use from that one book. Casters, however, have almost everything they need compiled into a single volume, so a caster can just choose the Spell Compendium for their one book, and get almost all of the advantages of going non-core.

The solution to this, of course, is to not just say "Core plus one book of your choosing". But unfortunately, not all DMs will see that.

[Amphetryon]

DMG only. "Abuse" of MIC in previous campaigns has soured my DM it pretty irrevocably. He's trying to "keep it simple" for the new guys - I'm trying to find something that'll still be fun to play.

I'm curious: What abuses were done via the MIC that are not available to an equally clever Player with items from the DMG?

[Chronos]

Quoth eggynack:

Probably more for the blasting and healing than for the summoning. Summoning is crazy versatile, and that ability alone would probably justify something like a tier two or three class. That's doubly true if the druid still maintains its non-casting class features.
Indeed. When I played a druid, I found that the spells I actually prepared were almost completely irrelevant, since so often, the best choice turned out to be a summon, anyway.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Everyone is weaker in Core-only, so the scale of what each Tier means is altered. But mostly, the classes get weaker by about the same percentage.

Bard is hurt more than most by the change. But it's still Tier 3. It's just a low Tier 3 instead of a super-high-Tier-3.

You can quibble about other changes, like whether the Rogue is better or worse than normal (relative to the other classes), or whether Wizards lose significantly more power than Druids in the change to Core Only. But ... that's just quibbling. Mostly, not much changes.

For most classes, non-core is mostly about nabbing more potent options.

For the rogue especially (among some other noncasters), the main thing is plugging the gaping massive holes the core designers left in them with hotfixes.


What others are saying is mostly true, but I'll add one addendum. Not all games are core-only or all-books, and in some of the middle ground, the gap between casters and noncasters can grow dramatically. Some DMs will allow something like "Core for everyone, plus one additional book for each character". This does very little for mundane characters, since the good mundane options are scattered here and there across the books: A skillmonkey, for instance, would be able to choose one and only one out of skill tricks, Darkstalker, or Craven, and choosing Darkstalker or Craven means almost nothing else of use from that one book. Casters, however, have almost everything they need compiled into a single volume, so a caster can just choose the Spell Compendium for their one book, and get almost all of the advantages of going non-core.

The solution to this, of course, is to not just say "Core plus one book of your choosing". But unfortunately, not all DMs will see that.

Yeah, this. This is so annoying, I hate it. The only thing more unbalanced than core is "core + X books." The caster stuff is HEAVILY concentrated, the noncaster goodies are scattered across dozens of books.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Most classes retain their Tier Rating in a Core-Only game. The only _big_ exception is the Bard, which drops to T4 or maybe even T5 due to lack of support. You know the cliché of useless Bards that can't do anything properly? That comes from Core Only environments.
Bardic Music is useless in core, sure. The rest of the class does OK.

You might argue that all non-casters (defined as anything with CL=level) drop a tier. Outside power attack and improved trip, there really aren't any good combat feats in core. There's no way to get both mobility and damage. No ACFs to get rid of your crappy class features. No ways to reduce MAD. Pretty much every redeeming factor (Spirit Lion Totem? Zhentrim Fighter? Swift Hunter? Battle Blessing? Penetrating Strike?) is gone.

[WhamBamSam]

Non-Core only is probably better balanced than Core only.

Wizard, Druid, and Cleric are still all solidly T1. They lose some efficiency, but they still do everything better than everyone else.

It's hard to say whether Sorcerers lose more or less relative to other full casters. On the one hand, a lot of the big things that Wizards get out of Core are the sort of thing that you don't use on a standard adventuring day, and hence aren't practical as Sorcerer spells known, but on the other hand, Sorcerer metamagic is a lot more of a pain in core, and they get a few other nice goodies besides that in later books. They're still T2 though, and everything below them comes out worse.

Bards, as others have said, drop from near the top of T3 to near the bottom, assuming they're played well with a focus on spells and skills. If you try to focus on Bardic Music you end up pretty useless.

Rangers and Rogues are probably both T4 with or without splat support. Ranger gets hurt a bit more. The Wildshape variant Ranger is T3, and a well optimized standard Ranger might get there as well with the help of the Spell Compendium and a few other things.

Barbarian drops to low T4 or T5, Fighter drops from high T5 to low T5 and has no way out. Monks lose a lot as well. They probably won't quite hit T6, but they won't hit much else either.

I think the Paladin might suffer the worst though. With splat support, you can optimize a Paladin to high T4 or T3. In Core-only, it's T5.

[Urpriest]

DMG only. "Abuse" of MIC in previous campaigns has soured my DM it pretty irrevocably. He's trying to "keep it simple" for the new guys - I'm trying to find something that'll still be fun to play.

If he's trying to "keep it simple" for the new guys, then I think he might get more mileage out of banning complicated classes, like Wizard, Druid, and Fighter. Stick the casters with full-list casters so they don't have to choose spells known or prepare spells, and the fighter-types with martial adepts so they have a set list of actions to take and don't need to learn combat maneuvers and feat chains right away.

[Gwendol]

Just to note that in core the bard is a lone T3, so where on that scale it sits is rather irrelevant. The ranger isn't very hot either in core; many good ranger spells are in the SC.

[lsfreak]

If he's trying to "keep it simple" for the new guys, then I think he might get more mileage out of banning complicated classes, like Wizard, Druid, and Fighter. Stick the casters with full-list casters so they don't have to choose spells known or prepare spells, and the fighter-types with martial adepts so they have a set list of actions to take and don't need to learn combat maneuvers and feat chains right away.

Honestly, I think the best way to keep it simple, while also maintaining balance and a sense of fun, is to ban everything except XPH and TOB. Pull from Core only what you need to play, with none of the classes or spells, only some of the feats, and the items. ToB is straightfoward except for multiclassing, XPH a little more complicated but much simpler than the mess of spell levels, spell slots, spells known, and spells prepared that most casters have (and with nice and condensed rules, no need for PHB2, HoH, CArc, and PHB like is needed for the three easy Vancian casters).

[Kennisiou]

Bard is T3, but the gap between him and T2 and T1 is much bigger. He may as well have no class features, since inspire courage with core only is massively unimpressive, as are his other bardic music options. He's literally T3 on only his spell list and skill list (both of which are solid), but then just by the skin of his teeth. Core only bard is basically worse beguiler.

Rogue I'd say is still T4 in core only, but low. Yes, it loses penetrating strike and debilitating strike and basically anything that lets it get past sneak attack immunity. Yes it has low HD and very little feat support. It's also now the best skill monkey in the game and also probably the best tripper in the game (spiked chain rogue with knockdown in core only is pretty solid imo -- grab some fighter levels for health, BAB, and bonus feats), and with tripping being melee's only real significant form of battlefield control now that kind of means something.

In core only I actually feel like monk is more impressive while fighter, Paladin, and Ranger are all less impressive. Monk's better skill list and slew of class features that aren't very good but are still better than most of the feats in core is pretty much what sells him for me. In core only I'd play monk 20 before fighter 20 (although I'd probably go a mix of the two classes before going 20 in either). They remain in the same tiers, but sort of rise and fall within them.

[eggynack]

In core only I actually feel like monk is more impressive while fighter, Paladin, and Ranger are all less impressive. Monk's better skill list and slew of class features that aren't very good but are still better than most of the feats in core is pretty much what sells him for me. In core only I'd play monk 20 before fighter 20 (although I'd probably go a mix of the two classes before going 20 in either). They remain in the same tiers, but sort of rise and fall within them.
I disagree. Feats in core are less impressive than feats out of core, but monk class features are far worse than those unimpressive feats. You can barely hit anything, and you have crappy AC, and to make up for it you get the usual bundle of monk crap. I'd say that monks are actually verging on tier six in a core only environment, as they don't compare all that favorably to a CW samurai.

[Chronos]

How is a rogue a better tripper than a fighter? I can't see that the rogue gets any class features at all that are useful for tripping, and a fighter at least has better BAB and feats that he can spend on Improved Trip. Oh, and proficiencies with a number of good tripping weapons.

[bekeleven]

Non-Core only is probably better balanced than Core only.
Now I'm picturing this and I like what I see.

You'd need to keep magical weapons and armor (unless doing one of the level-based bonus scales I see sometimes). A few feats, like exotic weapon proficiency, can't go. Skills are obviously still in. And I'm not including rules, like combat, attacks, etc. Unarmed strikes would be unchanged. You'd have to fix feat prerequisites, but it's doable.

Can you build a party with entirely non-core races, classes, feats, and items? I think so, yes. The largest hits would be power attack and chain shirts. I expect I'd see many strongheart halflings and silverbrow humans.

[Kennisiou]

How is a rogue a better tripper than a fighter? I can't see that the rogue gets any class features at all that are useful for tripping, and a fighter at least has better BAB and feats that he can spend on Improved Trip. Oh, and proficiencies with a number of good tripping weapons.

It's core. What feats is the rogue taking that preclude them not spending on the requirements for knockdown and a nice weapon prof?

Also, they're the only class in core with good reliable damage on attacks to easily proc knockdown with. That's my reasoning. Better BAB is definitely useful for the initial trip, but fighter isn't going to get that knockdown as easily as rogue is.

At least, that's my experience playing alongside core fighters that went tripper. It's possible they were just severely unoptimized and I didn't notice because it was a core fighter and I had mentally decided to not expect anything from them even if they were optimized.

[Chronos]

Nobody's getting that knockdown, because we're talking core-only.

[TuggyNE]

In Core, actually, Inspire Courage is very nice to help Power Attack along; the attack bonuses are each worth at least two extra damage per hit, and the damage bonuses are icing on the cake. This is because without Shock Trooper or Deep Impact or wraithstrike, Power Attack is best used minimally if at all: attack bonuses just aren't high enough.

[Rubik]

In Core, actually, Inspire Courage is very nice to help Power Attack along; the attack bonuses are each worth at least two extra damage per hit, and the damage bonuses are icing on the cake. This is because without Shock Trooper or Deep Impact or wraithstrike, Power Attack is best used minimally if at all: attack bonuses just aren't high enough.You're talking about the bard. They're talking about the rogue.

[WhamBamSam]

Now I'm picturing this and I like what I see.

You'd need to keep magical weapons and armor (unless doing one of the level-based bonus scales I see sometimes). A few feats, like exotic weapon proficiency, can't go. Skills are obviously still in. And I'm not including rules, like combat, attacks, etc. Unarmed strikes would be unchanged. You'd have to fix feat prerequisites, but it's doable.

Can you build a party with entirely non-core races, classes, feats, and items? I think so, yes. The largest hits would be power attack and chain shirts. I expect I'd see many strongheart halflings and silverbrow humans.I was being flippant, and getting rid of core feats does make for a bit of a mess, to the point where it's probably simpler just to leave them in. I mean, you can build a Binder with no Core feats, or maybe even a Swordsage, but what happens when the Binder binds Paimon and gets the benefits of Weapon Finesse and Whirlwind Attack, or the Swordsage gets the benefits of Weapon Focus, if those feats don't exist?

Also there are plenty of non-core monsters that cast as Sorcerers or Druids or whatever.

So you probably would need a fair bit of core stuff as a frame of reference.

...

Still though.

[Rubik]

I was being flippant, and getting rid of core feats does make for a bit of a mess, to the point where it's probably simpler just to leave them in. I mean, you can build a Binder with no Core feats, or maybe even a Swordsage, but what happens when the Binder binds Paimon and gets the benefits of Weapon Finesse and Whirlwind Attack, or the Swordsage gets the benefits of Weapon Focus, if those feats don't exist?

Also there are plenty of non-core monsters that cast as Sorcerers or Druids or whatever.

So you probably would need a fair bit of core stuff as a frame of reference.

...

Still though.Yeah. Just imagine what would happen when someone tries to attack, since there's no BAB or AC or HP. Or when someone tries to make a saving throw, and they suddenly realize they don't have saves. That'd be awkward.

[TuggyNE]

You're talking about the bard. They're talking about the rogue.

I'm aware of this. *shrug*

[The Trickster]

I was being flippant, and getting rid of core feats does make for a bit of a mess, to the point where it's probably simpler just to leave them in. I mean, you can build a Binder with no Core feats, or maybe even a Swordsage, but what happens when the Binder binds Paimon and gets the benefits of Weapon Finesse and Whirlwind Attack, or the Swordsage gets the benefits of Weapon Focus, if those feats don't exist?

Also there are plenty of non-core monsters that cast as Sorcerers or Druids or whatever.

So you probably would need a fair bit of core stuff as a frame of reference.

...

Still though.

I thought about running a game where the PH classes were banned, as well as the spells, unless another class referenced the spell. For example, a duskblade could use burning hands, since it is on his list. I would still ban adding spells to a character's list from PH, however. A warmage can't add any spells to their list from PH, for example.

I would leave feats in, as well as equipment and races. I don't really see a huge issue with them.

I would still have a few targeted bans, but I think that would be a start.

[Killer Angel]

People often tend to underestimate the huge boosts casters receive outside core. Metamagic reducers, DMM, wilding clasps, spells that further increase their ability to break action economy, go first, become invulnerable, and so on.
Casters, outside core, are decisely more powerful.

but the fact is: outside core, the other classes got a lot of more options, so they become more fun to play. In core you have a similar difference in power, but the options are minor.

The gap is still there, but style matters.

[Ivanhoe]

People often tend to underestimate the huge boosts casters receive outside core. Metamagic reducers, DMM, wilding clasps, spells that further increase their ability to break action economy, go first, become invulnerable, and so on.
Casters, outside core, are decisely more powerful.

but the fact is: outside core, the other classes got a lot of more options, so they become more fun to play. In core you have a similar difference in power, but the options are minor.

The gap is still there, but style matters.

+1.

Non-core material also provides the original core caster classes with ways to access non-caster stuff like more feats and class skills.
Meanwhile, I do not know of any way for a fighter or rogue to gain spellcasting (on a second thought, though, somewhere I think there was a way to get 9th level casting with just feats, but I am not sure what that was and whether it was legal).
In a nutshell, with everything I know of added, fighter and rogue gain some new feat options and skill tricks to jump higher or attack one more opponent per round, whereas e.g. the wizard can now build own planes, warp time, always go first, be practically invulnerable already at level 1, etc. to go full Tippyverse!
Cementing the tiers as we know them :smallamused:

[Rubik]

In a nutshell, with everything I know of added, fighter and rogue gain some new feat options and skill tricks to jump higher or attack one more opponent per round, whereas e.g. the wizard can now build own planes, warp time, always go first, be practically invulnerable already at level 1, etc. to go full Tippyverse!
Cementing the tiers as we know them :smallamused:While the casters do get new goodies, they can do all of that just in Core.

[Endarire]

Having played a solo campaign (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=16848817) recently, I say honestly that the most powerful spells I used were in core. I was a Gray Elf Generalist Wizard with some non-core classes and features, but most the spells I got and planned to get? All core. All powerful.

My most favoritest spell in this campaign? Charm person. With it, I handled things much more diplomatically than expected. When it came to combat, I unloaded with grease, glitterdust, scorching ray, and magic missile. I kept a potion of invisibility handy for emergencies. I hasted my minion army from animate dead and destroyed another's army of animate dead. I used alter self to assume a flying form (albeit a non-core one, but this could've changed with being an Aasimar or a Tiefling). At the end, I had a dimension door, charm monster, and improved invisibility handy. The final fight was won by charm monster, web, and a Diplomacy check.

What now? Well, Seymour, my Wizard, wants to level one more time to learn lesser planar binding for allies against the newest threat (and because astral projection (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/astralProjection.htm) at will (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/nightmare.htm) is pretty darn spiffy. Oh, and teleport is one of my favorite spells. I'm going Incantatrix3 at this level, so I get to Persist a buncha stuff, too, but that's outside the scope of this coreness.

Core is awesome for a Wizard! Outside core, a well-built Wizard benefits a bit. A core-only Wizard (excluding Red Wizard of Thay) vs an all-sources Wizard is still fairly competitive, though given the choice, I'd still rather have access to everything. It makes early life, especially pre-teleport much more interesting.

[TuggyNE]

While the casters do get new goodies, they can do all of that just in Core.

I dunno about always going first (no celerity, no Dire Tortoise form), but they can usually go first and can certainly manage the other things.

[Rubik]

I dunno about always going first (no celerity, no Dire Tortoise form), but they can usually go first and can certainly manage the other things.Contingency says hello. It certainly allows you to get your buff round on, if nothing else.

[wayfare]

Is XPH allowed? Because therre are a lot of useful items, enchantments, and the only gish-in-a-box in the core set there. But a lot of people dont consider it core

[TuggyNE]

Contingency says hello. It certainly allows you to get your buff round on, if nothing else.

It can trigger a spell, yes, but what spell are you using to, y'know, get an action and go? Just having your contingency go off doesn't count as going first, since you haven't actually taken an action.

[Rubik]

It can trigger a spell, yes, but what spell are you using to, y'know, get an action and go? Just having your contingency go off doesn't count as going first, since you haven't actually taken an action.It saves you from having to cast that spell during the first round of combat, if that counts. I mean, if you get, say, Polymorph up, it allows you to make a partial charge during the surprise round, or attack your enemy with your roper strands, or something, rather than having to use that action to buff, thereby leading to little to no difference between that and using Greater Celerity to get an extra action.

[Karnith]

Is XPH allowed? Because therre are a lot of useful items, enchantments, and the only gish-in-a-box in the core set there. But a lot of people dont consider it core
The Expanded Psionics Handbook is not generally considered a core rulebook because it does not have "Core Rulebook" printed on the front cover, as the Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Monster Manual do.

On-topic, I'm just going to echo what everyone else has been saying: the tiers remain the same. The full casters are still absurdly strong, and pretty much everything else suffers from a horribly reduced op-ceiling, but generally don't lose enough to change in tier.

[Eldariel]

It can trigger a spell, yes, but what spell are you using to, y'know, get an action and go? Just having your contingency go off doesn't count as going first, since you haven't actually taken an action.

Vs. people who can't trace Teleportation you can just have contingent Teleport wherever the hell, buff up and Greater Teleport right back in after you're done. They might move few hundred feet in those few rounds but that doesn't really make a difference unless they too are capable of teleportation (in which case I guess the encounter might just not occur).

[Doonesman]

Honestly, I think the best way to keep it simple, while also maintaining balance and a sense of fun, is to ban everything except XPH and TOB.

See, if MIC is banned, then XPH and TOB are ULTRABANNED. Same reason, actually: "abuses". Now I think of it, all these abuses from the past came from the same guy...

Someone asked for examples of MIC abuse, and the main problem came because the guy in question convinced the DM that (a) you can put enchantments on a monk's fists like they were magic weapons and (b) that enchantment should be impact and greater collision (which I can't even find, but apparently is a +10 to damage). Which meant that when this guy flurried, he was doing upwards of 100 damage a round. At about level 9. I eventually put a stop to that particular madness by threatening to quit if the monk was allowed vorpal hands. I'm not even going to *talk* about the gestalt campaign we ran...

[eggynack]

Which meant that when this guy flurried, he was doing upwards of 100 damage a round.
That statistic is actually really unimpressive, I've gotta say. Like, it's probably even unimpressive for a monk, especially when you use qualifiers like "upwards". Did this character even have a mechanism to get into full attack range consistently, and how often did he even manage to hit? You're using your group's odd interpretations of the rules helping a monk deal anything like real damage as a justification for banning the book that helped the monk. No part of that sentence makes sense to me.

Edit: Also, vorpal? It's one of the worst enhancements in the game. I mean, I could probably make a decent argument for the MIC being borked, between the belt of battle, anklets of translocation, wilding clasps, and amulets of vermin. The only problem is, I could probably make an even better argument for nearly any other book being even more borked.

[StreamOfTheSky]

See, if MIC is banned, then XPH and TOB are ULTRABANNED. Same reason, actually: "abuses". Now I think of it, all these abuses from the past came from the same guy...

Someone asked for examples of MIC abuse, and the main problem came because the guy in question convinced the DM that (a) you can put enchantments on a monk's fists like they were magic weapons and (b) that enchantment should be impact and greater collision (which I can't even find, but apparently is a +10 to damage). Which meant that when this guy flurried, he was doing upwards of 100 damage a round. At about level 9. I eventually put a stop to that particular madness by threatening to quit if the monk was allowed vorpal hands. I'm not even going to *talk* about the gestalt campaign we ran...

Monk being able to enhance his unarmed strikes for the same price and non-body slot as any other martial is NEVER a "problem." Cripes...
Also, Impact = keen for bludgeoning, Collision = +5 to damage for a +2 enhancement (do the math, you're losing +2 to hit and +2 damage for +5 damage...it's not generally worth it). No idea what greater collision is, perhaps it's +10 damage for a +4 enhancement.

I guess you're so used to monk being worse than a freaking Expert that the sight of one being competent sent you into a tailspin.

[Gemini476]

See, if MIC is banned, then XPH and TOB are ULTRABANNED. Same reason, actually: "abuses". Now I think of it, all these abuses from the past came from the same guy...

Someone asked for examples of MIC abuse, and the main problem came because the guy in question convinced the DM that (a) you can put enchantments on a monk's fists like they were magic weapons and (b) that enchantment should be impact and greater collision (which I can't even find, but apparently is a +10 to damage). Which meant that when this guy flurried, he was doing upwards of 100 damage a round. At about level 9. I eventually put a stop to that particular madness by threatening to quit if the monk was allowed vorpal hands. I'm not even going to *talk* about the gestalt campaign we ran...

Collision is a +1 enhancement for +5 damage, and Impact is a +1 enhancement that doubles the threat range (so 19-20/x2 for Unarmed Strikes).

So he made his Unarmed Strikes into 1d10+5+STR, 19-20/x2 weapons. For +4 total enhancement, so 32,000gp. That's assuming that he got a direct enhancement to his Unarmed Strike rather than an Necklace of Natural Weapons for +600gp for the same effect.

It's not that impressive, to be honest. Vorpal would cost 96,000gp to add to it and is a pretty garbage enchantment anyway, so I don't see what you were complaining about. I get a feeling that there's something that's missing from this story, since as far as I can tell that's pretty underpowered.

Chances are that your group misunderstood something regarding the rules - Vorpal only activates on a natural 20, for instance, not on any crit.

[Eldariel]

I'll say this:

Core Human Barbarian 9 (18+4+2+4+2 = 30 Strength while Raging) with Boots of Speed, +1 Greatsword and Power Attack (not even getting to tripping, multiclassing or whatever) under Enlarge Person affected by Permanency, and a Masterwork Weapon, is hitting CR appropriate encounters for ~80 damage a turn on average.

God forbid you have Improved Trip (looking at +18 to the check, which is higher than the defense rolls of Huge quadropeds in this CR range); Power Attack + Trip lets you hit average CR9 enemies (AC 22) for 100 damage a turn on average without even enhancing your weapon.

This is average accounting for your chances to hit, mind. When you hit everything you're dealing substantially more damage than that. And you have plenty of wealth, feats and levels not doing anything so you could raise that a tad if you want to. If you toss in e.g. Orc instead of Human, you're already looking at a substantial damage increase.


A bit shy of 100 damage on a full attack to CR appropriate enemies on level 9 is quite doable, and even to be expected from primary damage dealers. Battles in D&D tend towards short & brutal specifically because how easily you end up doing large chucks of damage as a warrior-type (Druid/Cleric/Barbarian/whatever).

Hell, full attack from a small TWF Rogue hits similar numbers; 80 or so on average.

[DMJeff]

Just to verify about the tier system. It deals just as much with other sources as the basic. Even warlocks and some old style UW (Sam's). The only thing you might switch is the warlock if your playing a moderate to heavy magic/magic item campaign. They can be the ultimate support character with their UMD take 10 ability's. Healer/Support/Blaster/Caster. However there should of been a Tier 12 for chaos mage's which appear to of been invented by that vindictive DM who feel's he is against the players. P.S Chaos mages have no real benefits and are plagued with a plethora of negatives that destroy and alter your character. Sure the author states blah blah but if you look and mixing multiple effects you cant really do what they set out to try.

Generally speaking if the rest of the group is mixed or exotic (Support possibly weak classes) Fighter as boring as they can sometimes be will help balance things out. The tank type feel can help Dispose of enemy's quicker (well those new player's get use to their ability's and spell's) And soak up alot of damage if you have to put your self in the direct line of fire. You never go wrong with a good old fashion tank. And it's better a more experienced character choosing what enemy's to step directly In front of then a less experienced one.

[Amphetryon]

Just to verify about the tier system. It deals just as much with other sources as the basic. Even warlocks and some old style UW (Sam's). The only thing you might switch is the warlock if your playing a moderate to heavy magic/magic item campaign. They can be the ultimate support character with their UMD take 10 ability's. Healer/Support/Blaster/Caster. However there should of been a Tier 12 for chaos mage's which appear to of been invented by that vindictive DM who feel's he is against the players. P.S Chaos mages have no real benefits and are plagued with a plethora of negatives that destroy and alter your character. Sure the author states blah blah but if you look and mixing multiple effects you cant really do what they set out to try.

Generally speaking if the rest of the group is mixed or exotic (Support possibly weak classes) Fighter as boring as they can sometimes be will help balance things out. The tank type feel can help Dispose of enemy's quicker (well those new player's get use to their ability's and spell's) And soak up alot of damage if you have to put your self in the direct line of fire. You never go wrong with a good old fashion tank. And it's better a more experienced character choosing what enemy's to step directly In front of then a less experienced one.

There are far too many circumstances where the portion I've highlighted simply isn't true, in 3.5. Fighters don't have built-in ways to deal with many resistances, or even with non-smash encounters, and there's no need for enemies to target or even engage the Fighter most of the time unless you're always traversing narrow corridors that disallow Flight, Burrowing, Teleportation magic, or attacks from Range, all of which would allow an enemy with Humanoid-level intellect (and above) to take out the targets that are behaving as actual threats.

[eggynack]

Fighters don't have built-in ways to deal with many resistances.
I think it's worthy of note that the inverse is also true. Fighters don't have built in resistances to deal with many offensive abilities. Fighters often have high HP and armor, but for any of the innumerable attacks that don't care about those numbers, the fighter can't soak up anything. Hell, even their chassis isn't necessarily better for defense than something like a cleric, because having an extra good save is probably more important than an extra HP per level. So, even if the enemies are specifically targeting the fighter for some reason, there is no assurance that the fighter will be more capable of soaking up attacks than the wizard running around with mirror image up.

[DMJeff]

I think it's worthy of note that the inverse is also true. Fighters don't have built in resistances to deal with many offensive abilities. Fighters often have high HP and armor, but for any of the innumerable attacks that don't care about those numbers, the fighter can't soak up anything. Hell, even their chassis isn't necessarily better for defense than something like a cleric, because having an extra good save is probably more important than an extra HP per level. So, even if the enemies are specifically targeting the fighter for some reason, there is no assurance that the fighter will be more capable of soaking up attacks than the wizard running around with mirror image up.

Well if the extra save is a big deal go ranger. Or better yet go Dwarf ranger. Still a martial character with an extra + 2 vs spells.As well there extra High save will come in more handy as reflex saves vs nasty fireballs ect.. High Att and healing capabilities. And as for the for them not soaking up anything.. It's generally considered CON is not a dump stat. Fighter generic. STR or Dex your choice CON. Cleric. WIS, CHA (Turn Undead) CON. Martial esque Type charecter. And to quote.

""there is no assurance that the fighter will be more capable of soaking up attacks than the wizard running around with mirror image up.""

Well maybe youll have a nice caster In the group who will Cast Blur on your Ranger Dwarf.

[eggynack]

Well if the extra save is a big deal go ranger. Or better yet go Dwarf ranger. Still a martial character with an extra + 2 vs spells.As well there extra High save will come in more handy as reflex saves vs nasty fireballs ect.. High Att and healing capabilities. And as for the for them not soaking up anything.. It's generally considered CON is not a dump stat. Fighter generic. STR or Dex your choice CON. Cleric. WIS, CHA (Turn Undead) CON. Martial esque Type charecter. And to quote.

""there is no assurance that the fighter will be more capable of soaking up attacks than the wizard running around with mirror image up.""

Well maybe youll have a nice caster In the group who will Cast Blur on your Ranger Dwarf.
The extra save is really just a minor thing, which should show how bad at tanking the supposedly tanky characters are. The only thing that fighters and rangers really have going for them, as far as tanking goes, is the higher HP and the ability to wear armor. Consider: what native protections does a fighter have against solid fog, or scorching ray, or even entangle? The answer is very little, and the little they do have protection from is protected against more by other classes.

If your only real defense as a character is your race and something a caster is doing for you then why the hell does the caster need you? He can just be a dwarf and cast blur, and also a bunch of other stuff, and be better defensively than you ever were. Tanking in D&D doesn't generally work the way you think it does. Good melee "tanking" builds are made of chain tripping AoO focused characters, or crusaders. This idea of a fighter standing on the front line and soaking up damage is one that doesn't fit into the game, because the front line is meaningless, and fighters aren't good at soaking up damage.

[Amphetryon]

Well if the extra save is a big deal go ranger. Or better yet go Dwarf ranger. Still a martial character with an extra + 2 vs spells.As well there extra High save will come in more handy as reflex saves vs nasty fireballs ect.. High Att and healing capabilities. And as for the for them not soaking up anything.. It's generally considered CON is not a dump stat. Fighter generic. STR or Dex your choice CON. Cleric. WIS, CHA (Turn Undead) CON. Martial esque Type charecter. And to quote.

""there is no assurance that the fighter will be more capable of soaking up attacks than the wizard running around with mirror image up.""

Well maybe youll have a nice caster In the group who will Cast Blur on your Ranger Dwarf.

Your first paragraph, as far as I can tell, doesn't address the issue that the Fighter - or other low-Tier non-caster - can't bypass most resistances or make himself a terribly credible threat against a wide swath of enemies. Those enemies, in turn, would have no reason to target the Fighter (or Ranger) with attacks that his good HP can soak, or that his good Save(s) can help him with.

As for having a nice caster in the group to buff you, that highlights the issue with low Tier Characters: They need other party members to help them deal with a theoretically standard adventure, while the higher Tier ones are much less reliant on having 'nice' teammates who buff them instead of buffing themselves.

[Killer Angel]

While the casters do get new goodies, they can do all of that just in Core.

Slower, and not in a so efficient way.
Clerzilla in core cannot simply work all day long, and without persist spell, you need time to boost yourself.
Druid works, but in core, you are a shapechanged caster, while outside, you are a shapechanged caster with all your magic items.
In core, one of the sorcerer's problem is action economy. Wings of cover, arcane fusion.


Contingency says hello. It certainly allows you to get your buff round on, if nothing else.

Which is true. But you have no Craft Contingency, so you have just one contingency, and you must choose how to use it.


with splatbooks, melers received huge boosts and variety, but we shouldn't forget that, while core casters are broken, casters with splatbooks are godly amazing.

[Eldariel]

The extra save is really just a minor thing, which should show how bad at tanking the supposedly tanky characters are. The only thing that fighters and rangers really have going for them, as far as tanking goes, is the higher HP and the ability to wear armor. Consider: what native protections does a fighter have against solid fog, or scorching ray, or even entangle? The answer is very little, and the little they do have protection from is protected against more by other classes.

If your only real defense as a character is your race and something a caster is doing for you then why the hell does the caster need you? He can just be a dwarf and cast blur, and also a bunch of other stuff, and be better defensively than you ever were. Tanking in D&D doesn't generally work the way you think it does. Good melee "tanking" builds are made of chain tripping AoO focused characters, or crusaders. This idea of a fighter standing on the front line and soaking up damage is one that doesn't fit into the game, because the front line is meaningless, and fighters aren't good at soaking up damage.

This is just a bug in the edition transition. AD&D Fighters had the best save charts (overall), they gained magic resistance/immunity as they got to real high levels and so on. They also gained more HP from bonus Con. In short, they actually were hard to kill by default. And of course, since Dex wasn't capped by Armor, wearing heavier Armor actually gave you higher AC.

A quick hack fix would just be to give all warriors all good saves, Mettle, SR 10+Warrior Level+½ other levels (might as well make it lowerable easy, swift or immediate), Magic Immunity around 17-20, twice the normal bonus HP from Con and gain like ½ the normal Dex-bonus to AC for each point over Max Dex Bonus your armor has (or just scaling improvement to Max Dex Bonus you can utilize). And hell, Touch AC scales way too slowly, so ½ level to AC as Dodge-bonus or something. And toss them some Fast Healing/Regeneration as well 'cause it really just makes sense.

Obviously with all these changes they'd still not have much in ways of tools to fight a caster but they would be quite close to an older edition Warrior if considering Warrior vs. non-Warrior durability; a Barbarian/Fighter/Ranger/Paladin Bruiser could actually take punishment better than their non-warrior counterparts at least on baseline.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Well if the extra save is a big deal go ranger.

Quality > Quantity.

I'd rather have a "medium" fortitude or will save (ie, starts at +1, ends at +9) than a good reflex save.

If you think just because cleric and ranger "both have two good saves" that their saves are of equal value, you are sorely mistaken. Reflex sucks.

[Eldariel]

Quality > Quantity.

I'd rather have a "medium" fortitude or will save (ie, starts at +1, ends at +9) than a good reflex save.

If you think just because cleric and ranger "both have two good saves" that their saves are of equal value, you are sorely mistaken. Reflex sucks.

Reflex and Touch AC basically measure the same thing anyways. It'd be easy to roll 'em into one, have it both be worthwhile and sensible. Of course, that'd require save bonus vs. AC normalization to some degree, kinda like with 4e.

[DMJeff]

The extra save is really just a minor thing, which should show how bad at tanking the supposedly tanky characters are. The only thing that fighters and rangers really have going for them, as far as tanking goes, is the higher HP and the ability to wear armor. Consider: what native protections does a fighter have against solid fog, or scorching ray, or even entangle? The answer is very little, and the little they do have protection from is protected against more by other classes.

If your only real defense as a character is your race and something a caster is doing for you then why the hell does the caster need you? He can just be a dwarf and cast blur, and also a bunch of other stuff, and be better defensively than you ever were. Tanking in D&D doesn't generally work the way you think it does. Good melee "tanking" builds are made of chain tripping AoO focused characters, or crusaders. This idea of a fighter standing on the front line and soaking up damage is one that doesn't fit into the game, because the front line is meaningless, and fighters aren't good at soaking up damage.

Well the supposedly tank characters are kind of tanky. Average (wealth per level) Fighter and wizard. say generic fighter +3 str mod 2d6 G sword + 1d6 flaming. +1 original enchantment. 11 average damage x 3 say. averageish 33. Wizard 1 shot spell better make it count. Do it by dice count 10 d6 fire ball vs 9d6 attack +9. Say both do max damage. Fighter say level 10 say hp 10 max for 1st 5 for level average Con main stat so say +2. 75 ish. WIZ 4 first, 2 average generic. 24. Provided the fighter makes his fort save he lives this toe to toe.

But this part. Quote If your only real defense as a character is your race and something a caster is doing for you then why the hell does the caster need you? Quote..

Well Because a low level wizard can be killed by a sneeze. It is conceivable that a goblin is an equal threat as A dragon lord is to a low level wizard. And since this is there starting campaign that wizard will need the tank. Now don't get me wrong I prefer casters to. And a good tank that takes care of me when I'm weak and cursing flying dagger or rather (Magic Missile) I'll take care of when I get Higher levels maybe even permancy and become God like. But I assure you that the starting Wizard needs a Good tank no tank.

And the good tank charecters aren't AOo tripper's but I guess thats just a matter of preference. And whether or not True conversions from 3.0 Complete warrior was adopted to 3.5. I belive the best tank was at least some barb class in there but been a while. Not that I dont like AOo controller's mind you.

[DMJeff]

Quality > Quantity.

I'd rather have a "medium" fortitude or will save (ie, starts at +1, ends at +9) than a good reflex save.

If you think just because cleric and ranger "both have two good saves" that their saves are of equal value, you are sorely mistaken. Reflex sucks.

I agree. But was pointing out if it was a big deal there is a martial charecter with two saves prime. Mind you.I guess reflex could suck. But dam that Iconic fireball stuff. If anything it is a perhaps more likely to take less damage.

[WhamBamSam]

See, if MIC is banned, then XPH and TOB are ULTRABANNED. Same reason, actually: "abuses". Now I think of it, all these abuses from the past came from the same guy...

Someone asked for examples of MIC abuse, and the main problem came because the guy in question convinced the DM that (a) you can put enchantments on a monk's fists like they were magic weapons and (b) that enchantment should be impact and greater collision (which I can't even find, but apparently is a +10 to damage). Which meant that when this guy flurried, he was doing upwards of 100 damage a round. At about level 9. I eventually put a stop to that particular madness by threatening to quit if the monk was allowed vorpal hands. I'm not even going to *talk* about the gestalt campaign we ran...This is the part where people are going to tell you that your DM doesn't understand the game, that the Monk in question was really pretty meh, yadda, yadda.

ToB and XPH have a high optimization floor, which makes them seem borked to people who are accustomed to a power level in their games where a monk like the one you're describing is overpowered relative to the encounters and the other players. Most of the people here see the high floor not as a bug, but as a feature, which makes the classes more accommodating to new players, among other things.

The Core casters have a very low optimization floor. In the hands of the inexperienced, they can seem balanced with the Core mundanes. But they also have a much higher cieling than the ToB classes or XPH classes (well, Psions beat out Wizards at the very top optimization levels levels, but are generally significantly less powerful at levels up to what most of us would consider high-op) do. A core-only Druid could probably find himself with an Animal Companion comparable to the Monk you're describing (at low levels, outright better) by choosing options based on little more than what seemed cool at the time. He can also produce summons which add up to the value of a few more monks between them in fairly short order before a fight starts, then reshape the battlefield to suit him and take down the opposition with spells. A core Druid could easily turn out an order of magnitude more powerful than the monk your DM say as such a huge problem, entirely by accident.



There are also a few tricks that could qualify as abusive (d2 Crusader (though that requires at least one other book), Save Game, etc.) but you ban those individual things if they're out of line with the power level of your game. Restricting to Core only doesn't prevent vast power disparity or rules abuse. In some ways, it encourages those things.

ToB and Psionics are really quite fun, well-balanced subsystems that could bring a lot of enrichment to your gaming experience. If you'd like, I could run a PhP or Skype game for you and/or your group with only the ToB and XPH classes allowed, since I've been itching for a new game lately and it seems polite for me to offer actual help instead of just an explanation of why the other person is wrong. It'd give you guys a chance to get used to the material without foisting it on a DM who isn't prepared for it.

[eggynack]

Well the supposedly tank characters are kind of tanky. Average (wealth per level) Fighter and wizard. say generic fighter +3 str mod 2d6 G sword + 1d6 flaming. +1 original enchantment. 11 average damage x 3 say. averageish 33. Wizard 1 shot spell better make it count. Do it by dice count 10 d6 fire ball vs 9d6 attack +9. Say both do max damage. Fighter say level 10 say hp 10 max for 1st 5 for level average Con main stat so say +2. 75 ish. WIZ 4 first, 2 average generic. 24. Provided the fighter makes his fort save he lives this toe to toe.
Damage is far from a wizard's only offensive tactic, and this isn't even the most damaging thing a wizard can do. And the fireball hits multiple enemies. And you're investing money on the fighter end. Fighters do damage, but damage isn't everything.



Well Because a low level wizard can be killed by a sneeze.
Not really, no. That's the whole point. HP is really the only thing a fighter has over a wizard in terms of defenses, and a solid wizard will have pretty high constitution, and a lot of other defenses besides.


And the good tank charecters aren't AOo tripper's but I guess thats just a matter of preference. And whether or not True conversions from 3.0 Complete warrior was adopted to 3.5. I belive the best tank was at least some barb class in there but been a while. Not that I dont like AOo controller's mind you.
AoO trippers are in fact among the best melee tank builds, because they can actually stop enemies from going places. Honestly, a lot of your assumptions about the game, fighters tanking with their bodies, wizards dying to a sneeze, and everything relying on damage, seems to apply to a game that is not this one.

[DMJeff]

Damage is far from a wizard's only offensive tactic, and this isn't even the most damaging thing a wizard can do. And the fireball hits multiple enemies. And you're investing money on the fighter end. Fighters do damage, but damage isn't everything.


Not really, no. That's the whole point. HP is really the only thing a fighter has over a wizard in terms of defenses, and a solid wizard will have pretty high constitution, and a lot of other defenses besides.


AoO trippers are in fact among the best melee tank builds, because they can actually stop enemies from going places. Honestly, a lot of your assumptions about the game, fighters tanking with their bodies, wizards dying to a sneeze, and everything relying on damage, seems to apply to a game that is not this one.

Again just generic or we start that oh I would build the charecter this way instead. And nope this game wizrads at low level's can die by a sneeze. And again the generally accepted tier system which I like and agree with is for higher level charecter's. And yes well wizards can have other offenses again we get into what build. But I assure you Im not crazy. You want your fighters close to you if your a level one wiz. And yeah this game. Even if i'm crazy. It's pretty universally accepted that wizards at low level's have to be more then a little carefull. Always has been. Maybe I am crazy. But if I had to bet on a level one fighter or a wizard and the prize money was a million. Im collecting winnings on the fighter. At least til the wizard gains some level's.

[eggynack]

Again just generic or we start that oh I would build the charecter this way instead. And nope this game wizrads at low level's can die by a sneeze. And again the generally accepted tier system which I like and agree with is for higher level charecter's. And yes well wizards can have other offenses again we get into what build. But I assure you Im not crazy. You want your fighters close to you if your a level one wiz. And yeah this game. Even if i'm crazy. It's pretty universally accepted that wizards at low level's have to be more then a little carefull. Always has been. Maybe I am crazy. But if I had to bet on a level one fighter or a wizard and the prize money was a million. Im collecting winnings on the fighter. At least til the wizard gains some level's.
I guess. Seems like a rather narrow argument, as your point is that fighters are effective tanks because they make somewhat effective tanks at a couple of levels at most. This also only applies in core, as outside of that you pick up stuff like abrupt jaunt. Also, anything dies to a sneeze at level one, rather than just wizards. Realistically, the best first level tank in core is almost certainly a druid, with his friendly riding dog accompanying him.

[Urpriest]

Again just generic or we start that oh I would build the charecter this way instead. And nope this game wizrads at low level's can die by a sneeze. And again the generally accepted tier system which I like and agree with is for higher level charecter's. And yes well wizards can have other offenses again we get into what build. But I assure you Im not crazy. You want your fighters close to you if your a level one wiz. And yeah this game. Even if i'm crazy. It's pretty universally accepted that wizards at low level's have to be more then a little carefull. Always has been. Maybe I am crazy. But if I had to bet on a level one fighter or a wizard and the prize money was a million. Im collecting winnings on the fighter. At least til the wizard gains some level's.

No, you don't. If your fighter is close to you, then the enemy in melee with the fighter is also close to you, which means they're going to attack you, not the fighter.

[DMJeff]

No, you don't. If your fighter is close to you, then the enemy in melee with the fighter is also close to you, which means they're going to attack you, not the fighter.

Thats a bit paranoid lol but I can see that. Better to try and Intercept then.

[The Trickster]

Thats a bit paranoid lol but I can see that. Better to try and Intercept then.

Wanna know the best way for a fighter to intercept the enemy? An AoO tripping build. :smallbiggrin: :smalltongue:

[DMJeff]

Wanna know the best way for a fighter to intercept the enemy? An AoO tripping build. :smallbiggrin: :smalltongue:


LOL true true.

[WhamBamSam]

Again just generic or we start that oh I would build the charecter this way instead. And nope this game wizrads at low level's can die by a sneeze. And again the generally accepted tier system which I like and agree with is for higher level charecter's. And yes well wizards can have other offenses again we get into what build. But I assure you Im not crazy. You want your fighters close to you if your a level one wiz. And yeah this game. Even if i'm crazy. It's pretty universally accepted that wizards at low level's have to be more then a little carefull. Always has been. Maybe I am crazy. But if I had to bet on a level one fighter or a wizard and the prize money was a million. Im collecting winnings on the fighter. At least til the wizard gains some level's.Arena fights are pointless for measuring effectiveness in an actual game, but that's probably not true. Worst case scenario for the Wizard is even odds based on who wins initiative, and a prepared, Core-only first level Wizard should be able to keep his tender flesh away from the pointy stick for a round by way of something like a Grease spell or a Summoned Monster so he can make it to his own turn and get off a Color Spray to end the fight. Hell, the Summoned Monster alone is a non-trivial fight for the Fighter at lv.1.


I guess. Seems like a rather narrow argument, as your point is that fighters are effective tanks because they make somewhat effective tanks at a couple of levels at most. This also only applies in core, as outside of that you pick up stuff like abrupt jaunt. Also, anything dies to a sneeze at level one, rather than just wizards. Realistically, the best first level tank in core is almost certainly a druid, with his friendly riding dog accompanying him.One post from a while back on these boards which really stuck with me was something to the effect of "if my Animal Companion dies, I perform a 24 hour in game ritual to get a new one. If the fighter dies, his player steals all the pizza and sulks off muttering about how awesome his next character will be, then comes back with a Monk/Paladin."

But yeah, even just in core, even at low levels, Wizards and especially Druids have easy access to tanks which are more or less on par with low level fighters, and are completely expendable. The scales are less unbalanced at low levels, but well prepared casters are still going to come out on top.

[Alent]

Arena fights are pointless for measuring effectiveness in an actual game, but that's probably not true. Worst case scenario for the Wizard is even odds based on who wins initiative, and a prepared, Core-only first level Wizard should be able to keep his tender flesh away from the pointy stick for a round by way of something like a Grease spell or a Summoned Monster so he can make it to his own turn and get off a Color Spray to end the fight. Hell, the Summoned Monster alone is a non-trivial fight for the Fighter at lv.1.

I have mixed feelings about this, arena absurdity aside. On one hand, I know better than to question caster superiority. On the other hand, summon monster lasts 1 turn/level and takes a full turn to cast. If I saw a wizard casting a spell that didn't finish on the end of his turn, I'd think "that guy's wiggling his fingers... imma chuck a throwing axe at his head."

Assuming you have dex and positive strength, any martial thrown weapon should be a 60%~70% chance to yield a wizard kill here? The Wizard can't really afford slots to mage armor and shield as he needs them for grease and summon and whatever nuke or save or suck he intends to hit you with.

Summoned Monsters need a few CLs and a lesser extend rod before they last long enough to be useful as meatshields, I would say at ECL3 core only wizards trump fighters, but before that it seems like kind of a crapshoot.

Expecting a Fighter to Tank is still a misunderstanding of core mechanics, but it sort of kind of works in those first two levels. Still better off trying to have enough dogs to form a defensive line, maybe a ranger to control them all and make any animal you run into into a meatshield for the wizard.

I love that quote about the animal companion death vs the fighter death, too. It's so true, I've seen my table's fighter/monk addict take death badly so many times. :smallmad:

[WhamBamSam]

I have mixed feelings about this, arena absurdity aside. On one hand, I know better than to question caster superiority. On the other hand, summon monster lasts 1 turn/level and takes a full turn to cast. If I saw a wizard casting a spell that didn't finish on the end of his turn, I'd think "that guy's wiggling his fingers... imma chuck a throwing axe at his head."

Assuming you have dex and positive strength, any martial thrown weapon should be a 60%~70% chance to yield a wizard kill here? The Wizard can't really afford slots to mage armor and shield as he needs them for grease and summon and whatever nuke or save or suck he intends to hit you with.

Summoned Monsters need a few CLs and a lesser extend rod before they last long enough to be useful as meatshields, I would say at ECL3 core only wizards trump fighters, but before that it seems like kind of a crapshoot.

Expecting a Fighter to Tank is still a misunderstanding of core mechanics, but it sort of kind of works in those first two levels. Still better off trying to have enough dogs to form a defensive line, maybe a ranger to control them all and make any animal you run into into a meatshield for the wizard.

I love that quote about the animal companion death vs the fighter death, too. It's so true, I've seen my table's fighter/monk addict take death badly so many times. :smallmad:That's probably a fair assessment. I wasn't thinking/checking durations. Still, it really depends on the exact circumstances of the fight. Given a suitable starting distance, the Wizard could cast Expeditious Retreat, rush in and Color Spray the Fighter from outside charge range.

Though all this really proves is that arena fights are a silly line of discussion, and that they depend on a lot of weird parameters which have very little to do with the actual game at hand.

I agree that at low levels Wizards don't have the same degree of absolute power relative to mundanes that they do at mid and high levels, but even if I expected the game not to go higher than second or third level, I'm not sure I'd ever feel safer with a Fighter in the party as opposed to a Wizard.

[Eldariel]

No hoops. Level 1 Wizard will cast either Sleep at long range, or ready/move + cast Color Spray at short range vs. a warrior. Grease on weapon is the only other likely action. These fights are a bit higher than 50% for Wizard usually (since Color Spray outranges melee attacks and Fighter's chances of saving are really bad compared to how likely the Wizard even with just Dex+10 is to be hit, and Color Spray is almost certainly game over while especially any ranged attack can turn out to not be lethal).

Summon Monster I is a straight-up terrible action, having the same 1-round casting time as Sleep and giving you a 1-round minion. One attack. Yay. Never prepare it level 1 unless you put a lot of work into it and even then, the minions are uninspiring. Usually, I prepare Grease/Sleep/Color Spray/Enlarge Person-or-Ray of Enfeeblement (does party want E. Person?) in my level 1 slots on level 1 in a party. Works well.

[Alent]

Though all this really proves is that arena fights are a silly line of discussion, and that they depend on a lot of weird parameters which have very little to do with the actual game at hand.

Yes and no. On the Wizard's side, it's utterly absurd. On the Fighter's side, I think it ends up helping a DM evaluate what sweet spot of action economy and tactics an opposing encounter of humanoids has to use to have a chance against the wizard without dooming the wizard to immediate death.

I don't think it unrealistic to have the party's level 1~2 wizard ducking under cover to get protection from thrown weapons and crossbows launched by that orc/kobold force that's stuck on the other side of the grease spell he just cast, for example. If they don't think they can walk across it and are watching people try and fail to stand up, they're gonna bonk the dude that conjured it unless there's a more pressing threat, right?

Still, level 3 feels like the break even point here. It's even a nice level for rogues to pretend to be tier 2 for a little while... if they get a wand of Summon Monster 2.

[Gemini476]

I have mixed feelings about this, arena absurdity aside. On one hand, I know better than to question caster superiority. On the other hand, summon monster lasts 1 turn/level and takes a full turn to cast. If I saw a wizard casting a spell that didn't finish on the end of his turn, I'd think "that guy's wiggling his fingers... imma chuck a throwing axe at his head."

Assuming you have dex and positive strength, any martial thrown weapon should be a 60%~70% chance to yield a wizard kill here? The Wizard can't really afford slots to mage armor and shield as he needs them for grease and summon and whatever nuke or save or suck he intends to hit you with.

Summoned Monsters need a few CLs and a lesser extend rod before they last long enough to be useful as meatshields, I would say at ECL3 core only wizards trump fighters, but before that it seems like kind of a crapshoot.

Expecting a Fighter to Tank is still a misunderstanding of core mechanics, but it sort of kind of works in those first two levels. Still better off trying to have enough dogs to form a defensive line, maybe a ranger to control them all and make any animal you run into into a meatshield for the wizard.

I love that quote about the animal companion death vs the fighter death, too. It's so true, I've seen my table's fighter/monk addict take death badly so many times. :smallmad:

Buying a scroll of Mage Armor and Shield (not crafting, because level one) is just 50gp total. That's +8 to AC. Shield'll last for a minute (so one fight), but Mage Armor lasts for an hour. Or you could be an Abjurer and have your specialization slot be Shield and thus save 25gp. Either way works.

A Wizard starts with 3d4*10gp (75gp) and a Fighter starts with 6d4*10gp (150gp). If the Fighter spends all of his starting gold on armor, scale mail (50gp) and a tower shield (30gp) will give him +8 to AC. He's down 30gp in comparison to the Wizard, though. And has to fight one-handed. If he fights two-handed with a Greatsword (50gp) he'll only have +4 to AC. He's also limited to +3 Dex (so AC 17) unless he coughs up 50gp extra for a chain shirt and gets AC 18 (with 18 Dex.) The Wizard has AC 18 before Dex, though, and Sleep is DC 11+Int vs. Will (+Wis, in the Fighter's case) and a Coup de Grace with a Scythe does 8d4+4*Str damage. (Average 20+4*Str.)

If the Wizard has 18 Int, the Fighter loses the match instantly 50% of the time. If he has 18 Wisdom. If he has 8, then he loses 75% of the time.

Hitting the Wizard will insta-gib him, but that's +6 to-hit (charging) vs. 20 or so AC. The Wizard loses on the first turn 35% of the time, in other words. 45% of the time if the Wizard has 10 Dex.

The Wizard has as much use for Dex as the Fighter does, so who wins initiative is 50/50.

As you can clearly see, in a cage match the odds clearly favor the Wizard.

[eggynack]

I don't think it's all that fair to assume consumables on the part of the wizard, given that they are quickly consumed, and thus not all that efficient at first level. It just doesn't seem like the kinda plan I'd use on a wizard in an actual game.

[Kennisiou]

Buying a scroll of Mage Armor and Shield (not crafting, because level one) is just 50gp total. That's +8 to AC. Shield'll last for a minute (so one fight), but Mage Armor lasts for an hour. Or you could be an Abjurer and have your specialization slot be Shield and thus save 25gp. Either way works.

A Wizard starts with 3d4*10gp (75gp) and a Fighter starts with 6d4*10gp (150gp). If the Fighter spends all of his starting gold on armor, scale mail (50gp) and a tower shield (30gp) will give him +8 to AC. He's down 30gp in comparison to the Wizard, though. And has to fight one-handed. If he fights two-handed with a Greatsword (50gp) he'll only have +4 to AC. He's also limited to +3 Dex (so AC 17) unless he coughs up 50gp extra for a chain shirt and gets AC 18 (with 18 Dex.) The Wizard has AC 18 before Dex, though, and Sleep is DC 11+Int vs. Will (+Wis, in the Fighter's case) and a Coup de Grace with a Scythe does 8d4+4*Str damage. (Average 20+4*Str.)

If the Wizard has 18 Int, the Fighter loses the match instantly 50% of the time. If he has 18 Wisdom. If he has 8, then he loses 75% of the time.

Hitting the Wizard will insta-gib him, but that's +6 to-hit (charging) vs. 20 or so AC. The Wizard loses on the first turn 35% of the time, in other words. 45% of the time if the Wizard has 10 Dex.

The Wizard has as much use for Dex as the Fighter does, so who wins initiative is 50/50.

As you can clearly see, in a cage match the odds clearly favor the Wizard.

I'd say the wizard absolutely has improved initiative (best l1 feat for wizard in core) while the fighter could have it but might not (since they probably want to spend their 2-3 l1 feats working their way up whatever feat chain they want to use).

[kardar233]

I recall reading a challenge where it was a single wizard versus a low-op level 1 party, and the wizard crushed them. Then they tried against a level 3 party, and the wizard still managed to pull out a couple of wins.

~EDIT~ Found the thread: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12638371#post12638371

[Rubik]

See, if MIC is banned, then XPH and TOB are ULTRABANNED. Same reason, actually: "abuses". Now I think of it, all these abuses from the past came from the same guy...

Someone asked for examples of MIC abuse, and the main problem came because the guy in question convinced the DM that (a) you can put enchantments on a monk's fists like they were magic weapons and (b) that enchantment should be impact and greater collision (which I can't even find, but apparently is a +10 to damage). Which meant that when this guy flurried, he was doing upwards of 100 damage a round. At about level 9. I eventually put a stop to that particular madness by threatening to quit if the monk was allowed vorpal hands. I'm not even going to *talk* about the gestalt campaign we ran...Given that the player is cheating, I'm fairly sure he's the one who should be banned.

And he's not even any good at optimization, considering everything he's doing is basically crap.

[Urpriest]

I'd say the wizard absolutely has improved initiative (best l1 feat for wizard in core) while the fighter could have it but might not (since they probably want to spend their 2-3 l1 feats working their way up whatever feat chain they want to use).

I don't think it's even a chance, really. If you're taking Fighter levels, you're doing it because you want access to some feats earlier than you otherwise would. That's literally the purpose of the class.

[Rubik]

Summon Monster I is a straight-up terrible action, having the same 1-round casting time as Sleep and giving you a 1-round minion.Sleep is also a straight-up terrible spell as well, since it only ever works if your enemies are incredibly weak (4 HD max? Really?) and don't bother moving for an entire round. You must aim for a 10' radius space, rather than a creature, so you'd better hope they don't ever take move actions.

[edit] It's basically for ambushes and very little else.

[eggynack]

Sleep is also a straight-up terrible spell as well, since it only ever works if your enemies are incredibly weak (4 HD max? Really?) and don't bother moving for an entire round. You must aim for a 10' radius space, rather than a creature, so you'd better hope they don't ever take move actions.
The former isn't an issue at higher levels, or in this case, and I think you're just wrong about the second issue. According to the PHB, page 174, "You make all pertinent decisions about a spell (range, target, area, effect, version, and so forth) when the spell comes into effect." Thus, your opponent would have to move out of medium range on their turn to escape the spell. Not an unfeasible thing by any means, but it's not like you have to rely on an enemy that's stuck in a 10 foot radius.

[Rubik]

The former isn't an issue at higher levels, or in this case, and I think you're just wrong about the second issue. According to the PHB, page 174, "You make all pertinent decisions about a spell (range, target, area, effect, version, and so forth) when the spell comes into effect." Thus, your opponent would have to move out of medium range on their turn to escape the spell. Not an unfeasible thing by any means, but it's not like you have to rely on an enemy that's stuck in a 10 foot radius.You know, I always thought that the effect comes into play when you start casting. I appear to have missed a very important rule, which does, indeed, make Sleep a much better spell.

[Eldariel]

Sleep is also a straight-up terrible spell as well, since it only ever works if your enemies are incredibly weak (4 HD max? Really?) and don't bother moving for an entire round. You must aim for a 10' radius space, rather than a creature, so you'd better hope they don't ever take move actions.

Don't you select your target on spell resolution? (Aiming a Spell (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#aimingASpell): "You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell." - and no, Sleep doesn't have a Target-line, but lacking any other indicator, I'd expect that clause applies to Area spells too)

Moving should be no obstacle except if the enemy moves out of the spell range (possible in some scenarios). The flexibility of having something for 15'-100' makes preparing Sleep worth it generally tho. Yeah, the HD limit is annoying but it's better than nothing.

EDIT: Swordsages afoot.

[Hurnn]

This is just a bug in the edition transition. AD&D Fighters had the best save charts (overall), they gained magic resistance/immunity as they got to real high levels and so on. They also gained more HP from bonus Con. In short, they actually were hard to kill by default. And of course, since Dex wasn't capped by Armor, wearing heavier Armor actually gave you higher AC.

A quick hack fix would just be to give all warriors all good saves, Mettle, SR 10+Warrior Level+½ other levels (might as well make it lowerable easy, swift or immediate), Magic Immunity around 17-20, twice the normal bonus HP from Con and gain like ½ the normal Dex-bonus to AC for each point over Max Dex Bonus your armor has (or just scaling improvement to Max Dex Bonus you can utilize). And hell, Touch AC scales way too slowly, so ½ level to AC as Dodge-bonus or something. And toss them some Fast Healing/Regeneration as well 'cause it really just makes sense.

Obviously with all these changes they'd still not have much in ways of tools to fight a caster but they would be quite close to an older edition Warrior if considering Warrior vs. non-Warrior durability; a Barbarian/Fighter/Ranger/Paladin Bruiser could actually take punishment better than their non-warrior counterparts at least on baseline.


Was this text suposed to be BLUE? or did you play a different AD&D than me? Im looking at page 79 in the DMG right now and FIghters have the hands down WORST saves of all classes.

As to the 1v1 fight at first level in the other posts wizard wins 75% of the time, fighter basically has to get lucky.

[Eldariel]

Was this text suposed to be BLUE? or did you play a different AD&D than me? Im looking at page 79 in the DMG right now and FIghters have the hands down WORST saves of all classes.

As to the 1v1 fight at first level in the other posts wizard wins 75% of the time, fighter basically has to get lucky.

I was talking about AD&D 2e, the '95 release specifically. That's the book I have handy here. To assist with the discussion, I transcribed the tables:
{table=head]Level|Death|Wand|Poly|Breath|Spell
1-3|10|14|13|16|15
4-6|9|13|12|15|14
7-9|7|11|10|13|12
10-12|6|10|9|12|11
13-15|5|9|8|11|10
16-18|4|8|7|10|9
19+|2|6|5|8|7[/table]
{table=head]Level|Death|Wand|Poly|Breath|Spell
1-4|13|14|12|16|15
5-8|12|12|11|15|13
9-12|11|10|10|14|11
13-16|10|8|9|13|9
17-20|9|6|8|12|7
21+|8|7|4|11|5[/table]
{table=head]Level|Death|Wand|Poly|Breath|Spell
0|16|18|17|20|19
1-2|14|16|15|17|17
3-4|13|15|14|16|16
5-6|11|13|12|13|14
7-8|10|12|11|12|13
9-10|8|10|9|9|11
11-12|7|9|8|8|10
13-14|5|7|6|5|8
15-16|4|6|5|4|7
17+|3|5|4|4|6[/table]
{table=head]Level|Death|Wand|Poly|Breath|Spell
1-5|14|11|13|15|12
6-10|13|9|11|13|10
11-15|11|7|9|11|8
16-20|10|5|7|9|6
21+|8|3|5|7|4[/Table]
So, yeah, Warriors don't start off especially well but they have the best iterative save scaling (and most iterations) and better saves on level 17 than most have on 20+. Hell, by 5-6 they already match everyone else overall (yes, I'm aware of the XP tables; just doing a level-by-level comparison for now though). Unlike everybody else, they don't really have any weaknesses either - at Cloak of Resistance +5 they need to roll a 1 to pass save vs. Spell (of course, there're penalties but this is about as good as it gets as a baseline).

They easily crush Rogues and Mages in most important spells on most levels and overall have better save charts than Priests even tho their Death-save is worse.

[Hurnn]

I was talking about AD&D 2e, the '95 release specifically. That's the book I have handy here. To assist with the discussion, I transcribed the tables:
{table=head]Level|Death|Wand|Poly|Breath|Spell
1-3|10|14|13|16|15
4-6|9|13|12|15|14
7-9|7|11|10|13|12
10-12|6|10|9|12|11
13-15|5|9|8|11|10
16-18|4|8|7|10|9
19+|2|6|5|8|7[/table]
{table=head]Level|Death|Wand|Poly|Breath|Spell
1-4|13|14|12|16|15
5-8|12|12|11|15|13
9-12|11|10|10|14|11
13-16|10|8|9|13|9
17-20|9|6|8|12|7
21+|8|7|4|11|5[/table]
{table=head]Level|Death|Wand|Poly|Breath|Spell
0|16|18|17|20|19
1-2|14|16|15|17|17
3-4|13|15|14|16|16
5-6|11|13|12|13|14
7-8|10|12|11|12|13
9-10|8|10|9|9|11
11-12|7|9|8|8|10
13-14|5|7|6|5|8
15-16|4|6|5|4|7
17+|3|5|4|4|6[/table]
{table=head]Level|Death|Wand|Poly|Breath|Spell
1-5|14|11|13|15|12
6-10|13|9|11|13|10
11-15|11|7|9|11|8
16-20|10|5|7|9|6
21+|8|3|5|7|4[/Table]
So, yeah, Warriors don't start off especially well but they have the best iterative save scaling (and most iterations and the only level 0 save values) and better saves on level 17 than most have on 20+. Unlike everybody else, they don't really have any weaknesses either - at Cloak of Resistance +5 they need to roll a 1 to pass save vs. Spell (of course, there're penalties but this is about as good as it gets as a baseline).

They easily crush Rogues and Mages in most important spells on most levels and overall have better save charts than Priests even tho their Death-save is worse.

The thing is death and spell are the killers, and they are bad. Death they are equal or close to everyone else but the vs spell? yikes you wont live long enough to get to the good saves.

Oh yeah of course they are the only ones with a 0 level save because everything that was 0 level used it, i.e. npcs with no class levels and 0 level warrior hirelings (read cannon foder) other classes simply didnt have 0 level because they were considered better than fighters.

[Eldariel]

The thing is death and spell are the killers, and they are bad. Death they are equal or close to everyone else but the vs spell? yikes you wont live long enough to get to the good saves.

Their Death-save is only second to Priest and even there, it's really good. I don't know what you're talking about...? And yeah, Spell is their worst save but that's actually not all that common a save; Death, Paralysis, Poison, Poly, Petri and Implement saves all take precedence, which covers majority of the important offensive spells and abilities. Yeah, Sleep/Confusion are annoying early on but hardly dealbreakers, especially since you can just go Elf for the Sleep immunity.

[Alent]

Buying a scroll of Mage Armor and Shield (not crafting, because level one) is just 50gp total. That's +8 to AC. Shield'll last for a minute (so one fight), but Mage Armor lasts for an hour. Or you could be an Abjurer and have your specialization slot be Shield and thus save 25gp. Either way works.

A Wizard starts with 3d4*10gp (75gp) and a Fighter starts with 6d4*10gp (150gp). If the Fighter spends all of his starting gold on armor, scale mail (50gp) and a tower shield (30gp) will give him +8 to AC. He's down 30gp in comparison to the Wizard, though. And has to fight one-handed. If he fights two-handed with a Greatsword (50gp) he'll only have +4 to AC. He's also limited to +3 Dex (so AC 17) unless he coughs up 50gp extra for a chain shirt and gets AC 18 (with 18 Dex.) The Wizard has AC 18 before Dex, though, and Sleep is DC 11+Int vs. Will (+Wis, in the Fighter's case) and a Coup de Grace with a Scythe does 8d4+4*Str damage. (Average 20+4*Str.)

If the Wizard has 18 Int, the Fighter loses the match instantly 50% of the time. If he has 18 Wisdom. If he has 8, then he loses 75% of the time.

Hitting the Wizard will insta-gib him, but that's +6 to-hit (charging) vs. 20 or so AC. The Wizard loses on the first turn 35% of the time, in other words. 45% of the time if the Wizard has 10 Dex.

The Wizard has as much use for Dex as the Fighter does, so who wins initiative is 50/50.

As you can clearly see, in a cage match the odds clearly favor the Wizard.

I don't understand the logic here. You spend either 2/3rds or 1/3rd of the Wizard's entire starting WBL to defeat the Fighter then deliberately waste all of the Fighter's WBL on armor that completely precludes his ability to defeat the wizard?

Eggynack said it:


I don't think it's all that fair to assume consumables on the part of the wizard, given that they are quickly consumed, and thus not all that efficient at first level. It just doesn't seem like the kinda plan I'd use on a wizard in an actual game.

Bringing heavy consumables into the mix in a cage fight seems like it just skews the scenario in favor of neither class: the WBL, items, and initiative are doing battle in a vacuum, the classes just happen to be window dressing to a game of rocket tag.

You remove the limit of having to actually build and prepare for adventuring, the fighter goes straight dex, skips armor since it does no good here, takes improved initiative, point blank shot, far shot, gets a smokestick, a few acid vials (10gp ea), then pays 60gp to a 3rd level cleric to cast Silence on a 50gp tanglefoot bag while the Wizard's reading his armor scrolls.

Unfair? Totally. It's completely unrealistic and isn't actually a legitimate solo encounter- it's just an arena match with consumables in the style of "ultimate 5 minute workday"

I like my cage matches to vaguely resemble a real scenario, like "Crap, I got caught away from the party when scouting ahead for them." and feature actual adventuring gear and partially spent spellslots because, hey, middle of a regular workday. That way it's not so much a cage fight and more plausible scenario. You're also more likely to run into line of sight issues in real adventuring, which makes the "best" solution highly variable and not necessarily one the choice of butter, live crickets, and colored sand is suited to.

Random aside that was probably obvious: weapon greasing a fighter with sheathed backup weapons is just wasted action economy. He doesn't even need quickdraw.

I'm not trying to argue that Fighters are viable or anything of the sort, just that a level 1 core wizard trying to solo something is fighting an uphill battle. I still think by level 3 by any rulebook selection, a wizard has opened up enough options that the fighter's situation becomes hopeless no matter what alchemy he brings to the table.

[Hurnn]

I don't understand the logic here. You spend either 2/3rds or 1/3rd of the Wizard's entire starting WBL to defeat the Fighter then deliberately waste all of the Fighter's WBL on armor that completely precludes his ability to defeat the wizard?

Eggynack said it:



Bringing heavy consumables into the mix in a cage fight seems like it just skews the scenario in favor of neither class: the WBL, items, and initiative are doing battle in a vacuum, the classes just happen to be window dressing to a game of rocket tag.

You remove the limit of having to actually build and prepare for adventuring, the fighter goes straight dex, skips armor since it does no good here, takes improved initiative, point blank shot, far shot, gets a smokestick, a few acid vials (10gp ea), then pays 60gp to a 3rd level cleric to cast Silence on a 50gp tanglefoot bag while the Wizard's reading his armor scrolls.

Unfair? Totally. It's completely unrealistic and isn't actually a legitimate solo encounter- it's just an arena match with consumables in the style of "ultimate 5 minute workday"

I like my cage matches to vaguely resemble a real scenario, like "Crap, I got caught away from the party when scouting ahead for them." and feature actual adventuring gear and partially spent spellslots because, hey, middle of a regular workday. That way it's not so much a cage fight and more plausible scenario. You're also more likely to run into line of sight issues in real adventuring, which makes the "best" solution highly variable and not necessarily one the choice of butter, live crickets, and colored sand is suited to.

Random aside that was probably obvious: weapon greasing a fighter with sheathed backup weapons is just wasted action economy. He doesn't even need quickdraw.

I'm not trying to argue that Fighters are viable or anything of the sort, just that a level 1 core wizard trying to solo something is fighting an uphill battle. I still think by level 3 by any rulebook selection, a wizard has opened up enough options that the fighter's situation becomes hopeless no matter what alchemy he brings to the table.

You are right about the buying items just for the fight being bs but he is right about imp initiative for a lvl 1 wizard especially a human its great. However, wizard casts: Charm person, hypnotisim, sleep, grease, color spray, cause fear, ray of enfeblement, reduce person. He either wins or makes you suck so bad he will win.

[Alent]

(Edit: some frustration bled over into this that shouldn't have. Sorry for the tone and excessive absolutism.)


You are right about the buying items just for the fight being bs but he is right about imp initiative for a lvl 1 wizard especially a human its great. However, wizard casts: Charm person, hypnotisim, sleep, grease, color spray, cause fear, ray of enfeblement, reduce person. He either wins or makes you suck so bad he will win.

I didn't disagree with improved initiative at all. If you'll note on my retaliatory build I actually used it, and depending on the character I use it over the table, too.

That said... Most of those spells do not work as well as you think they do at level 1.

Color spray is the only guaranteed win on that list and that's rocket tag: if the fighter goes first with you within 45 feet, you are dead. We've already pointed out why sleep is worthless inside of initiative. The bad mind control spells effectively autobreak in combat and cannot be used as anything but time grabs. (might help? probably won't.) At level 1 Cause fear has a 1 turn duration and a 30 ft range and forces the fighter to base and kill you. Ray of enfeeblement really isn't going to do anything but reduce the overkill damage you die by, and one turn grease just makes both of you waste a turn.

If you load up on too many of these you lose defensive options like mage armor and you may have already spent some of them in an earlier encounter. Assuming a cage fight and perfect save or suck conditions, the fighter loses every time, but even in a cage fight conditions are never perfect. To say nothing of if the fighter is the second or third encounter of 3 to 5 encounter workday? Real workdays are basically the bane of a level 1 wizard.

Reduce person is the one I can't figure out why you'd even mention. Reduce person is a buff that makes the fighter kill you better.

By level 3? linear fighter/quadratic wizard has had enough advancement iterations to change the scenario from first level lightning tag to the caster supremacy we all know and love. You have enough HP to soak a ranged attack and can just walk up and toss guano crusted tarts at the fighter, wave a feather, then coup de grace and go home.

[georgie_leech]

You are right about the buying items just for the fight being bs but he is right about imp initiative for a lvl 1 wizard especially a human its great. However, wizard casts: Charm person, hypnotisim, sleep, grease, color spray, cause fear, ray of enfeblement, reduce person. He either wins or makes you suck so bad he will win.

Eh, those aren't likely to work at all. An 18 STR can still kill you pretty quickly even if hit by 1d6+1 Damage, and the net effect of Reduce Person is a slight decrease in damage (-2 STR and a smaller weapon) at the cost of a 1 round cast time and giving them a slight boost to Reflex saves and initiative.

[Eldariel]

Color spray is the only guaranteed win on that list and that's rocket tag: if the fighter goes first with you within 45 feet, you are dead. We've already pointed out why sleep is worthless inside of initiative.

Fighter is usually looking at like ~60%-65% (18 Str and 1 BAB = +5, Wizard should have ~16 Dex for 13 AC) chance to hit in melee if we assume the Wizard isn't e.g. abusing Tower Shield Total Cover rules. Ranged, Fighter prolly has worse Dex so it's lower than that.

It's far from a guarantee that he hits his first attack. The Fighter is generally looking at like 25%-30% chance of making the save (18 Int + 1 Level = DC 15 Will-save at Fighter's +0-+1 Wis so +0-+1) so the Wizard is looking at 70%-75% chance of winning vs. Fighter's 60%-65%.


Also, Sleep is fine when the engagement happens at appropriate ranges (outside move+Color Spray, or Charge range). It's also a convenient spell to have around vs. e.g. Ogres and stuff.

[DMJeff]

I don't understand the logic here. You spend either 2/3rds or 1/3rd of the Wizard's entire starting WBL to defeat the Fighter then deliberately waste all of the Fighter's WBL on armor that completely precludes his ability to defeat the wizard?

Eggynack said it:



Bringing heavy consumables into the mix in a cage fight seems like it just skews the scenario in favor of neither class: the WBL, items, and initiative are doing battle in a vacuum, the classes just happen to be window dressing to a game of rocket tag.

You remove the limit of having to actually build and prepare for adventuring, the fighter goes straight dex, skips armor since it does no good here, takes improved initiative, point blank shot, far shot, gets a smokestick, a few acid vials (10gp ea), then pays 60gp to a 3rd level cleric to cast Silence on a 50gp tanglefoot bag while the Wizard's reading his armor scrolls.

Unfair? Totally. It's completely unrealistic and isn't actually a legitimate solo encounter- it's just an arena match with consumables in the style of "ultimate 5 minute workday"

I like my cage matches to vaguely resemble a real scenario, like "Crap, I got caught away from the party when scouting ahead for them." and feature actual adventuring gear and partially spent spellslots because, hey, middle of a regular workday. That way it's not so much a cage fight and more plausible scenario. You're also more likely to run into line of sight issues in real adventuring, which makes the "best" solution highly variable and not necessarily one the choice of butter, live crickets, and colored sand is suited to.

Random aside that was probably obvious: weapon greasing a fighter with sheathed backup weapons is just wasted action economy. He doesn't even need quickdraw.

I'm not trying to argue that Fighters are viable or anything of the sort, just that a level 1 core wizard trying to solo something is fighting an uphill battle. I still think by level 3 by any rulebook selection, a wizard has opened up enough options that the fighter's situation becomes hopeless no matter what alchemy he brings to the table.

A good premise for the how it happened toe to toe that was the original goal and it wasn't a pit fight design just a what if they had to fight. And again with all said and whatever builds it's a one shot hope for the wizard even a shrink successful or not doesn't guarantee the low level wiz a victory. Also not to add confusion but for a tanky new player build "Helping a wizard that sort of turned into could he take the wizard at low level's, Dwarf ranger was mentioned. + 2 vs spe;; to prime saves one includes ref. And I agree if this was to be a fair assumption gear shouldn't be formulated for the specific fight.

[eggynack]

It's just not a very meaningful point on any metric. You've constructed this incredibly narrow situation so that the fighter will shine, with core only and first level, and even then some of the setups skew towards the wizard. Even were this meaningful within the confines of a duel scenario, it would still have limited applications in a real game, because arena matches touch the real world so lightly.

Edit: Also, first level druids are the best core class at tanking for reasons beyond the expendability of the animal companion. Riding dogs, beyond the fact that you can replace them at any time, also have HP and AC to rival most melee classes, as well as a trip attack that naturally controls the battlefield without any real cost, and their bite attack isn't exactly weak either. Druids also get entangle, which is one of the best spells in the game for utterly locking down an encounter such that it can't hit you in the face, and they get to double down on attacks just by backing up their dog with a sling. Druids even have the capacity to heal themselves, which isn't my favorite thing in the world, but it's nice to have. It's not like the druid chassis is falling to a stiff breeze either, so between the druid and the animal companion, you end up with a combined HP that exceeds what just about anything else in existence can bring to the table. Druids are neat.

[Gemini476]

I don't understand the logic here. You spend either 2/3rds or 1/3rd of the Wizard's entire starting WBL to defeat the Fighter then deliberately waste all of the Fighter's WBL on armor that completely precludes his ability to defeat the wizard?


Sorry, that's an artifact from when I was planning to set 'em both up against a monster to show that the Wizard is actually harder to hit than the Fighter is.

Other than that, I'm fairly certain that the cage match is a solvable problem at level 1. There are a bunch of variables (Fighter's Wis, Str, Dex, Con, Wizard's Str, Dex, Con, Int, armor bonuses of both, initiative bonuses, weapon damage), but Excel can solve that rather handily. I might need to make a flowchart, though.

Wizards are pretty good in cage matches, though. It's easier to nova. Also, the Wizard has 2-3 spells per day (although I'll assume 3, since generalists are painful at low levels), so Mage Armor+Sleep+Sleep is a very real possibility, should both survive round 1.

What should I assume as a battleground? Surprise round 60' apart (via monkey in box), so the Wizard can buff with his 1 hour duration spell and the Fighter can get within charging range? Should I rerun it with a Dwarven Ranger as well?

I checked the size of some roman amphitheatres and I saw that one in England had a 200'x130' arena, so I'm pretty unsure what should be done. (10'x10'x10' room, Orc Fighter 1, treasure chest in corner?)
I'll make the assumption that the Wizard 1 has buffs up and the Fighter 1 is within charging range, if no-one objects. If the Fighter is not within charging range, then that is just effectively equal with the Wizard winning initiative. If the Wizard is beyond run+charge range, then the Wizard gets off two spells and the Fighter probably loses outright.

I'll get to work on building a framework, anyway. This could probably be reworked to calculate chances of any two specific level one classes fighting each other, but you need a specific build to run the numbers. Core Only helps a bunch.

[Ivanhoe]

While the casters do get new goodies, they can do all of that just in Core.

As TuggyNE and Killer Angel have outlined, that is not really true.
Also, e.h. spells like celerity (for lower levels) or genesis (for higher levels) really make a huge difference. Abrupt jaunt ACF at level 1 is providing more protection for a 1st level wizard conjurer than anything the core rules can come up with etc.


Having played a solo campaign (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=16848817) recently, I say honestly that the most powerful spells I used were in core. I was a Gray Elf Generalist Wizard with some non-core classes and features, but most the spells I got and planned to get? All core. All powerful.

But apparently in that thread you have linked you chose to play a non-core wizard. Why did you do it, if not for more versatility/impact? (in particular in a solo campaign, thanks by the way for the effort and description - that thread was a good read!).
Choosing the Incantatrix PrC and non-core templated combat animals at your side is not really showing that non-core gains little for casters :smallwink:


My most favoritest spell in this campaign? Charm person. With it, I handled things much more diplomatically than expected. When it came to combat, I unloaded with grease, glitterdust, scorching ray, and magic missile. I kept a potion of invisibility handy for emergencies. I hasted my minion army from animate dead and destroyed another's army of animate dead. I used alter self to assume a flying form (albeit a non-core one, but this could've changed with being an Aasimar or a Tiefling). At the end, I had a dimension door, charm monster, and improved invisibility handy. The final fight was won by charm monster, web, and a Diplomacy check.

Those are great spell selections and apparently caused you to succeed/survive, however:

Imagine you'd have had the massive libris mortis etc stuff for boosting your animate dead legions (multiplying the core power definitely!);
when you speak about scorching ray, isn't, say, a spell like power word pain significantly more powerful at low levels? (more damage, no attack roll needed, 1st instead of 2nd level...)
or... you did alter self into a non-core flying form (since iirc there is no such form in core and aasimar/tiefling have LA in core) showing the big power boost even at low levels for wizards.
you bring up the invisibility line of spells/effects - you likely know the superior invsibility spell which opens completely new avenues for a wizard to escape or remain unnoticed. Granted, not for the levels of your solo campaign, but there are many swift/immediate action low-level spells which would have been superior to drawing (move action) and drinking a potion of invisbility (standard action) in an emergency.
Even the great charm monster / diplomacy check combo would have been supported quite well by non-core spells like voice of the dragon (SpC), providing +10 (!) to your diplomacy check (and it's not even an enchantment spell).


I am pretty sure that my examples are by no means complete.


What now? Well, Seymour, my Wizard, wants to level one more time to learn lesser planar binding for allies against the newest threat (and because astral projection (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/astralProjection.htm) at will (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/nightmare.htm) is pretty darn spiffy. Oh, and teleport is one of my favorite spells. I'm going Incantatrix3 at this level, so I get to Persist a buncha stuff, too, but that's outside the scope of this coreness.

Well, non-core gives plenty of more outsiders to choose from for lesser planar binding. And there are plenty of teleporting spells already at low levels which are not available in core (like the 1st!-level spell benign transposition).


Core is awesome for a Wizard! Outside core, a well-built Wizard benefits a bit. A core-only Wizard (excluding Red Wizard of Thay) vs an all-sources Wizard is still fairly competitive, though given the choice, I'd still rather have access to everything. It makes early life, especially pre-teleport much more interesting.

Yes, the wizard of Thay is quite powerful ... but imagine all the additional spells in the splatbooks that also get increased by that prestige class!
All the additional rules provide so much more for casters (note that we focused on the wizard only. When it comes to druids and clerics, it is similar in my view - just look at single class abilities like turn undead and animal companion).
What do the old PHB noncaster classes get with the rules additions? Hardly the same amount of power, versatility and options. As I said, a new feat here, a skill variant use there, hardly anything earth-shaking.

Therefore, the core tiers would need to reflect this steep power gain for casters in the regular tier list (possibly the ranking would still be the same, but casters would be much closer in power to non-casters).

[eggynack]

What do the old PHB noncaster classes get with the rules additions? Hardly the same amount of power, versatility and options. As I said, a new feat here, a skill variant use there, hardly anything earth-shaking.

I disagree. Casters get a lot, and non-casters get more. While the things the casters get may be better than what a non-caster gets in a vacuum, the stuff that non-casters get is a lot better than what they were getting before, while the stuff that casters get is just a higher quantity of spells that are along the same lines in terms of power. A wizard in core is a tier one, and a wizard out of core is a tier one. No movement there. A fighter in core is a tier five, but when you include non-core material, they can easily head into tier four, and when you toss some of the more caster-ish stuff onto a paladin, they can drift towards tier three or four.

[Eldariel]

What do the old PHB noncaster classes get with the rules additions? Hardly the same amount of power, versatility and options. As I said, a new feat here, a skill variant use there, hardly anything earth-shaking.

It's worse than that: Non-casters only gain basic competence outside Core. Rogue doesn't work in Core. Too many things you can't Sneak Attack. You need non-Core sources (Penetrating Strike, Gravestrike/Vinestrike/Golemstrike or the appropriate Crystals) to be able to do anything at all as Rogue. Not to mention, Hide is **** in Core. You need Darkstalker to function vs. half the monster manual, most kinds of spellcasters and even simple guard dogs. And Craven is the only way to bring your damage up to par.

Barbarians get Whirling Frenzy, Street Fighter to reward actually taking further levels in the class, access to Tumble, Extra Rage to remain relevant on low levels, easy access to Improved Trip, Knock-Down and the actual damage setups with Pounce, Shock Trooper, Leap Attack, Valorous and so on. In Core the only way to accomplish damage + move as a warrior is a mounted charge with Spirited Charge. Non-core enables warriors to move while doing damage. That's a pretty damn key ability.

Fighters get Dungeoncrasher, Zhentarim Fighter, Weapon Mastery, Overpowering Attack, things that actually make the class worth taking. There are also enough good feats outside Core that getting bonus feats beyond the first two is meaningful. Then they get Hit'n'Run Fighter/Thug for extra skills, Initiative Bonus, Dex to damage as sneak attack and so on; they gain actual class features! Fighter-class only exists for more than 2 levels outside Core.

Of course, Monk gains supermassive bonuses too (Invisible Fist, Martial Monk & al.), Pally can actually be viable if you move their bonus spells to Strength (Illumian), Ranger gets Mystic Ranger, Wildshape Ranger, Swift Hunter, etc. to actually be good at what they're supposed to be good at and offer new archetypes, Pally/Ranger gain actually useful spells that assist them in doing their thing, etc.

And that's without going to things like Lockdown. No matter how good a Core Warrior you are, a Wizard/spellcasting monster never fails to cast next to you in Core with defensive casting - also, anyone with Tumble can just walk outta your range no matter what you do, no AoOs. Thicket of Blades and Mage Slayer are semi-necessary. Non-core warriors also gain the ability to actually deal with Illusions and defensive magic (Pierce Magical Concealment), and ways to gain massive bonuses to attack/defense (Law Devotion, Knowledge Devotion, etc.).

That's without going into the magic items; flight in Core is absurdly expensive and Warriors are all but dependent on it. Splitting Bow is really the only thing that actually makes Archery worth your while. Cheap, swift action teleportation and multipliers all allow warriors to address their issues and the simple option of being able to combine basic magic item bonuses with magic items with abilities is absolutely crucial for warriors to keep up numerically while also getting the necessary magic item abilities.


In short, outside Core, Warriors get:
- Class chassises that provide you with abilities that do something.
- Relevance from level 1 to about level 9.
- Ability to move and deal damage beyond level 6.
- Ability to control the battlefield and protect your allies in a way that inconveniences even spellcasters.
- Ability to fly, teleport and get immunities at reasonable price while still getting all the necessary numeric bonuses.

The thing is, Core Casters are already competent. No, they're amazing! They can do everything you could want done already. Spells to gain superforms with the combat abilities (Polymorph Any Object is the only way to permanently gain the Pounce in Core for instance, and you need Pounce unless you're always charging on your horse), spells to control enemies, spells to move, spells to gain the numeric bonuses you want, casters cover all that.

Core is even nice enough to include Metamagic Rods for some free metamagic, a couple of superb Caster Level boosters, some great caster PRCs (none for mundanes except maybe for Horizon Walker), all that. A non-Core caster gains nice, but ultimately unnecessary stuff.


Core warrior, on the other hand, is not really competent. You get reliable flight way too late and it's vulnerable to dispelling. Your skills don't work reliably (e.g. Hide vs. Darkstalker, Tumble lacking the higher uses, etc.), archery damage doesn't keep up with levels, you can't attack and move without effectively skipping a turn after level 6, items doing things you need done are too expensive, your control is full of holes so you can be bypassed, you lack immunities necessary to actually take hits, bonus feats (common class feature for warriors) are worthless since there are barely enough feats worth taking with your 7-9 normal feats (2 Fighter-levels), there are no worthwhile feat chains so gaining exceptional amounts of feats (see Fighter) doesn't amount to anything, core warriors just suck.

Anything a Core Fighter can do, a Druid can do better. A Cleric can match them and a Wizard Gish surpasses them in a while too. All because the caster classes can buff to avoid needing the ridiculous amounts of items, they actually can acquire Pounce (and thus ability to attack and move, a kind of a key thingy) with simple shapeshifting magic, they can fly with a spell, they can dispel protections and protect their own with other spells, etc.

Outside Core, the warriors at least gain some things they can do that casters don't have that easy of a time doing. The classes do things. The archetype can function standing in front of the team as an impenetrable bastion of defense that rips anything that comes nearby apart, as the whirling bullet of doom that destroys anything standing in its way, as the unseen death skulking the city, they do stuff.

[Ivanhoe]

I disagree. Casters get a lot, and non-casters get more.

Could you provide an example?
Say, what kind of 1st level power do non-casters get that rivals a power word pain and an abrupt jaunt?
What do they get that equals a genesis spell at level 17?

Yes, a fighter can get more versatility by receiving more class skills (though not more skill points), try a ToB maneuver, or boost his damage with the dungeon crusher ACF at low levels - but is that really closing the gap to a wizard?

Paladin I am not quite sure about - there is prorably a lot of stuff added in the Champions of Valor and the Book of Exalted deeds. So they are bound to move up a tier.

[eggynack]

Could you provide an example?
Say, what kind of 1st level power do non-casters get that rivals a power word pain and an abrupt jaunt?
What do they get that equals a genesis spell at level 17?
I don't think you understand. Nothing a mundane character will ever do will ever rival what a tier one class is capable of. Ever. However, that's not what I'm claiming. See, when you move a wizard from core to out of core, they move from polymorph to celerity. When you move a fighter from out of core they move from just tripping and power attack to a zhentarim soldier dungeoncrasher, possibly with shock trooper. The difference that the wizard is experiencing is less, even if the specific spells they're gaining are technically worth more in a vacuum. Wizard spells in core were already great, and now they're also great. Mundane characters in core were horrible, and now they can experience something like basic competence. Basic competence is less than great, but the difference between great and also great is smaller than the difference between horrible and basic competence.


Yes, a fighter can get more versatility by receiving more class skills (though not more skill points), try a ToB maneuver, or boost his damage with the dungeon crusher ACF at low levels - but is that really closing the gap to a wizard?
No. It's shrinking the gap.


Paladin I am not quite sure about - there is probably a lot of stuff added in the Champions of Valor and the Book of Exalted deeds. So they are bound to move up a tier.
Paladins are likely at their highest tier when they're trying their best to be a crap-wizard. That means sword of the arcane order, mystic fire knight, and battle blessing in some combination, even if those things don't necessarily synergize perfectly. The inspire courage thing you're noting is also good, and they get a number of other solid ACF's.

[DMJeff]

So, following discussion in my group, I've come here to get the experts' opinion.

While the generally accepted tiers make sense, how do they apply to characters restricted tightly to the Player's Handbook? Is the power of wizards reduced when they're held to the spells in Chapter 11? Do paladins get relatively more effective when their only real competion in the divine-servant arena is the cleric?

Basically, I'm looking to create an effective and efficient character to play in a campaign myself and another experienced player are using to introduce three people to D&D, and we've agreed (he's the DM) that my character will have to be pretty tough to back up/cover for the new guys. Any suggestions or advice?

Ideally when I mentioned originally perhaps one of the experienced should take the mundane role of Fighter. knowing who to step in front of could be useful.

Others assumed monsters go for a one hit one wonder low level wizard and mobs rush the cloaked figure in dire fear of grease or sleep. The fighter could help the other's particularly the least experienced players survive with the simple role. That was what evolved this into a is the low level wizard better then the fighter pit fight. Some numbers were ran just to try and show that although not a particular for a power build even with the plethora of feats I still stand firm in the early levels a fighter can make a good support tank for the group as a whole. With feats allowing different kinds of attacks and mob clean up's with power attacks and cleaves to help preserve spell's. However No question that a later level wizard will excel. And I still stand by it. Also the wizard dosent fight one on one usually. Its mob vs group. fighting one NPC/Monster can happen but none the less. I wont go over challenge rating's you should all know them or know where to look them up. And again A goblin or small group of can be just as dangerous to a low level wizard as a dragon king. You will find the tactician wizard gets along well even with a fighter/ dwarven ranger ect.. and remembers his friend even in the later days perhaps when he has Permanency and gains folds of power.

And the more experienced player can turn his fighter into a deadly glass cannon for the later level's. (Or fake a knee Injury that can't be healed and hopefully bring in another class.)

So a one on one? Who know's who care's. As a group you want both the tank and theWizard and as many group combat options as possible. Yes the wizard will eventually be powerfully. But a few spell's In the beginning does not make him the lone wolf he has to be careful with his spells and choose the right time. The fighter can "Swing Away" at anything that moves or try's to take down his friend in the robe.

[georgie_leech]

No. It's shrinking the gap.




I think you might be meaning different things there. If a Fighter has 1* arbitrary point of competence in Core, and the Wizard has 100, the Wizard is 100 times as competent as the Fighter. If out of core, the Wizard gains 20 points while the Fighter gains 1; now the Wizard is only 60 times better than the Fighter, even as the total gap increases from 99 to 118.

*Please don't quibble about the numbers, they're to illustrate a point and don't reflect my views on relative power balance in/outside Core.

[eggynack]

I think you might be meaning different things there. If a Fighter has 1* arbitrary point of competence in Core, and the Wizard has 100, the Wizard is 100 times as competent as the Fighter. If out of core, the Wizard gains 20 points while the Fighter gains 1; now the Wizard is only 60 times better than the Fighter, even as the total gap increases from 99 to 118.

That sounds about right, I suppose. I don't know exactly how it looks, but I think that it does represent a gap shrinking, when moving from 100 to 120 keeps you in your tier, while moving from 1 to 2 presumably means a boost in tier.

[DMJeff]

[QUOTE=eggynack;16874139]I don't think you understand. Nothing a mundane character will ever do will ever rival what a tier one class is capable of. Ever. However, that's not what I'm claiming. See, when you move a wizard from core to out of core, they move from polymorph to celerity. When you move a fighter from out of core they move from just tripping and power attack to a zhentarim soldier dungeoncrasher, possibly with shock trooper. The difference that the wizard is experiencing is less, even if the specific spells they're gaining are technically worth more in a vacuum. Wizard spells in core were already great, and now they're also great. Mundane characters in core were horrible, and now they can experience something like basic competence. Basic competence is less than great, but the difference between great and also great is smaller than the difference between horrible and basic competence.


Just to confer as Tier one states if we all agree to generally accept it. It refer's to those tier one classes Only as they evolve and particularly at higher level's. Anyways basically the Tier represent's their potential for power, game break but as it states almost always at higher level's.

[georgie_leech]

That sounds about right, I suppose. I don't know exactly how it looks, but I think that it does represent a gap shrinking, when moving from 100 to 120 keeps you in your tier, while moving from 1 to 2 presumably means a boost in tier.

Mm, I'm of the view that even if the overall gap increases (and I think it might; Astral Projection is a lot riskier without your own personal demi-plane, for instance), it helps relative power balance. A difference of 100 competence units is meaningless if most classes have millions; what's important is the relative levels, not the absolute difference.

[eggynack]

Just to confer as Tier one states if we all agree to generally accept it. It refer's to those tier one classes Only as they evolve and particularly at higher level's. Anyways basically the Tier represent's their potential for power, game break but as it states almost always at higher level's.
It depends on the class, and on what you mean by "higher levels". Wizards are around the same place as fighters at level one or so, trading away a bit of durability for a massive number of options, and with abrupt jaunt in hand they are probably significantly more powerful than most classes in the early stages of the game. If there is any disparity in the non-wizard's favor, it probably goes away within a couple of levels, which defines "higher levels" as anything above somewhere around level two.

However, druids don't even face that deficit. They're much more powerful than just about any mundane option at level one, much more powerful at level twenty, and also much more powerful at every level in between. Clerics are similar, owing to their highly reasonable chassis, but they don't reach the same heights of early level power that druids do. To be clear, the tier system tends to measure the game from level 6-15, though it can describe things reasonably outside of that, if not perfectly.

[Ivanhoe]

Sorry about this long answer –it tries to address as many of Eldariel’s post as possible.


It's worse than that: Non-casters only gain basic competence outside Core. Rogue doesn't work in Core. Too many things you can't Sneak Attack. You need non-Core sources (Penetrating Strike, Gravestrike/Vinestrike/Golemstrike or the appropriate Crystals) to be able to do anything at all as Rogue. Not to mention, Hide is **** in Core. You need Darkstalker to function vs. half the monster manual, most kinds of spellcasters and even simple guard dogs. And Craven is the only way to bring your damage up to par.

I am not quite sure what you mean. Sneak attack affects most monsters and npcs in core. How many monsters are plants, constructs and undead in the MM I? Say, 25%?
So basically the rogue’s ability to sneak attack gets boosted by +33% when getting items to sneak those immune creatures (and they need magic mart for those items, they need to buy them while casters can choose their new spells for free!).
+33%! Compare that to the multiplication (=+200% or more…) that the wizard damage output gets by just comparing power word pain to magic missile or even scorching ray.
And hide will work against most monsters of the MM I as well, no darkstalker needed (remember that stuff like tremorsense and blindsense even have limited range).
Yes darkstalker feat (meaning: you have to spend a feat slot for it, the rogue does not get it for free in non-core!) is nice, but in the non-core arms race there are now things like superior invisbility the wizard gets which is much, much better.


Barbarians get Whirling Frenzy, Street Fighter to reward actually taking further levels in the class, access to Tumble, Extra Rage to remain relevant on low levels, easy access to Improved Trip, Knock-Down and the actual damage setups with Pounce, Shock Trooper, Leap Attack, Valorous and so on. In Core the only way to accomplish damage + move as a warrior is a mounted charge with Spirited Charge. Non-core enables warriors to move while doing damage. That's a pretty damn key ability.

All of this just boosts eventually their damage output, so they get to one-shot monsters fasters. Possibly (note that non-core monsters sometimes get more absurd power for their CR than even dragons)
Meanwhile, wizards gain methods to boost their damage output (to similar percentages/multiplyers), their divination potential, their social interaction spells and their stealth, and all also at much, much lower levels. Practically all their tier versatility is multiplied, while the barbarian gets just to do damage better.
It is good to be the king. :)


Fighters get Dungeoncrasher, Zhentarim Fighter, Weapon Mastery, Overpowering Attack, things that actually make the class worth taking. There are also enough good feats outside Core that getting bonus feats beyond the first two is meaningful. Then they get Hit'n'Run Fighter/Thug for extra skills, Initiative Bonus, Dex to damage as sneak attack and so on; they gain actual class features! Fighter-class only exists for more than 2 levels outside Core.

I actually, when playing fighters in the old core days (when not many additional rules were available yet), already felt feat-starved. By level 10, I wanted to play a seasoned veteran able to be a decent archer (3 feats gone), do whirlwind attack vs many mooks (5 feats), have tripping and disarming skills (2 more feats) and boost a bit the skills I head (2-3 feats), plus must haves like improved initiative and blind-fight. That was already impossible. Now more feats non-core without more feats overall? Thank you.
It is like getting 100 dollars and a small shop full of interesting things.
And all of a sudden a huge supermarket opens with way more things, but you still have only 100 dollars. Great. (meanwhile, your wizard buddy not only gets to buy in the new supermarket, but everything for a cheaper price! Or just for free)
And being horseshoed into a maniac crashing people into walls or evil setting-specific soldiers to just gain some more d6 damage and more use out of one skill is not really my imagination of what could close a gap to a wizard who gets that, and much, much more. (although, at a second glance, zhentarim soldier at least is a rare case of providing benefits for free to a non-caster).


Of course, Monk gains supermassive bonuses too (Invisible Fist, Martial Monk & al.), Pally can actually be viable if you move their bonus spells to Strength (Illumian), Ranger gets Mystic Ranger, Wildshape Ranger, Swift Hunter, etc. to actually be good at what they're supposed to be good at and offer new archetypes, Pally/Ranger gain actually useful spells that assist them in doing their thing, etc.

Granted, ranger and paladin may move up the tiers a bit – but the monk is widely considered a hopeless case, with or without ACFs and dragon material (the latter sources probably not even used in the original tier list).


And that's without going to things like Lockdown. No matter how good a Core Warrior you are, a Wizard/spellcasting monster never fails to cast next to you in Core with defensive casting - also, anyone with Tumble can just walk outta your range no matter what you do, no AoOs. Thicket of Blades and Mage Slayer are semi-necessary. Non-core warriors also gain the ability to actually deal with Illusions and defensive magic (Pierce Magical Concealment), and ways to gain massive bonuses to attack/defense (Law Devotion, Knowledge Devotion, etc.).

Defensive casting? Really? How often does this come up when the caster can just 5ft step away? Or, in case of reach weapons, use immediate and swift spells for more actions and ways out of a tight situation than a fighter ever gets with the additional rules?
That is not really closing the power gap – on the contrary. Wizards get more things to remain out of the fighter’s ways to attack. (if you intend to consider PvP, or PvNPC caster).
I haven’t seen a caster being disrupted in his spellcasting in a long, long time, core or non-core.
Knowledge Devotion is quite nice, though (but more easily accessible for casters. Again.)


That's without going into the magic items; flight in Core is absurdly expensive and Warriors are all but dependent on it. Splitting Bow is really the only thing that actually makes Archery worth your while. Cheap, swift action teleportation and multipliers all allow warriors to address their issues and the simple option of being able to combine basic magic item bonuses with magic items with abilities is absolutely crucial for warriors to keep up numerically while also getting the necessary magic item abilities.

Yes, items can provide more help to non-casters in the new optional rules. But what does that mean? The tiers are rated without magic marts in mind iirc.


In short, outside Core, Warriors get:
- Class chassises that provide you with abilities that do something.
- Relevance from level 1 to about level 9.
- Ability to move and deal damage beyond level 6.
- Ability to control the battlefield and protect your allies in a way that inconveniences even spellcasters.
- Ability to fly, teleport and get immunities at reasonable price while still getting all the necessary numeric bonuses.

I think that already in core, warriors will be relevant to level 9, so there is no increase of power here. Mounted archers can move and deal damage already in core, as can things like polymorphed pouncing barbarians. There are more methods now (mostly with items), but only meh increase in power here.


The thing is, Core Casters are already competent. No, they're amazing! They can do everything you could want done already. Spells to gain superforms with the combat abilities (Polymorph Any Object is the only way to permanently gain the Pounce in Core for instance, and you need Pounce unless you're always charging on your horse), spells to control enemies, spells to move, spells to gain the numeric bonuses you want, casters cover all that.

Core is even nice enough to include Metamagic Rods for some free metamagic, a couple of superb Caster Level boosters, some great caster PRCs (none for mundanes except maybe for Horizon Walker), all that. A non-Core caster gains nice, but ultimately unnecessary stuff.

Yes, nice, and possibly unnecessary. But still, a multiplication of amazing is multiplied amazing – while the non-casters are just doing their mundane stuff a bit better, and make a bit more use out of the new magic item mart section. Again, that is not closing the gap.


Core warrior, on the other hand, is not really competent. You get reliable flight way too late and it's vulnerable to dispelling. Your skills don't work reliably (e.g. Hide vs. Darkstalker, Tumble lacking the higher uses, etc.), archery damage doesn't keep up with levels, you can't attack and move without effectively skipping a turn after level 6, items doing things you need done are too expensive, your control is full of holes so you can be bypassed, you lack immunities necessary to actually take hits, bonus feats (common class feature for warriors) are worthless since there are barely enough feats worth taking with your 7-9 normal feats (2 Fighter-levels), there are no worthwhile feat chains so gaining exceptional amounts of feats (see Fighter) doesn't amount to anything, core warriors just suck.

Most of these things I already answered above. The same things that make core warriors suck in that list also apply when adding non-core rules: no flight without magic mart, archery gets pawned hard (and harder) by spells, too few feat slots and skill points to be filled by better feats (while wizard just add some more spellbooks to hold all these nice new things), etc.


Anything a Core Fighter can do, a Druid can do better. A Cleric can match them and a Wizard Gish surpasses them in a while too. All because the caster classes can buff to avoid needing the ridiculous amounts of items, they actually can acquire Pounce (and thus ability to attack and move, a kind of a key thingy) with simple shapeshifting magic, they can fly with a spell, they can dispel protections and protect their own with other spells, etc.

At least in core a druid cannot do archery better. I bet in non-core there are better druid archers (zen archery feat anyone?), wizard gets even better polymorph forms with MM II+ books, avoid wbl tax for items with cheap new spells that are more powerful for their level in core, persist metamagic clericzillas make fighters (even dungeoncrashers) completely redundant, at lower levels than in the core rules etc.


Outside Core, the warriors at least gain some things they can do that casters don't have that easy of a time doing. The classes do things. The archetype can function standing in front of the team as an impenetrable bastion of defense that rips anything that comes nearby apart, as the whirling bullet of doom that destroys anything standing in its way, as the unseen death skulking the city, they do stuff.

You mean the new items do things, the classes hardly do so – although ranger and paladin may have a better time. There is nothing that they can do that casters cannot also do in non-core. At least in core, the casters needed the non-casters longer for being an “impenetrable bastion of defense”.

To sum up: Casters with the additional rules get so many earth-shaking powers, it’s crazy. That may not be considered to be a real change to the core setting where they can already earth-shaking things. However, they also get
1) many ways to access completely different powers (like sorcerers getting more spells known, clerics more non-divine spells via domains, druids more spells in general to brush up the worst full caster list in core) and
2) all of the earth-shaking powers at lower levels than before. That is a major difference.
Meanwhile, a 6th level fighter with dungeoncrasher ACF gets exactly what way to fly, detect invisible opponents, fight caster tricks, remain stealthy or gain minions? None at all. You could possibly build even fighters in core that at level 6 get quite close to the dungeoncrasher damage output. Certainly it does not change the game experience for a player wanting to play a fighter that can compete with the druid and his new fleshraker warbeast animal companion.

But it may also be that we have different gaming experience here. I was really disappointed by the meagre power increase for non-casters every since Complete Warrior came out. ToB was the best of the new rules for non-casting options in that regard, but that also essentially said: Replace the old classes with these new ones!

[Gwendol]

I disagree. Casters get a lot, and non-casters get more. While the things the casters get may be better than what a non-caster gets in a vacuum, the stuff that non-casters get is a lot better than what they were getting before, while the stuff that casters get is just a higher quantity of spells that are along the same lines in terms of power. A wizard in core is a tier one, and a wizard out of core is a tier one. No movement there. A fighter in core is a tier five, but when you include non-core material, they can easily head into tier four, and when you toss some of the more caster-ish stuff onto a paladin, they can drift towards tier three or four.

I strongly disagree: T1 (and T2) casters go from super strong to ridiculous levels. Non-casters basically just cover their bases. The paladin is a corner case and not a general one.

[georgie_leech]

If Wizards can have a solution for everything already, does it impact balance for them to gain additional solutions to problems they could already solve?

[eggynack]

I strongly disagree: T1 (and T2) casters go from super strong to ridiculous levels. Non-casters basically just cover their bases. The paladin is a corner case and not a general one.
Between those two situations, super strong to ridiculous, and not covering their bases to covering their bases, I think that the latter gets the better deal. If you're just covering your bases, that means those bases were uncovered, and in that case, what were you even doing? Not much, is usually the answer.

[Ivanhoe]

I think you might be meaning different things there. If a Fighter has 1* arbitrary point of competence in Core, and the Wizard has 100, the Wizard is 100 times as competent as the Fighter. If out of core, the Wizard gains 20 points while the Fighter gains 1; now the Wizard is only 60 times better than the Fighter, even as the total gap increases from 99 to 118.

*Please don't quibble about the numbers, they're to illustrate a point and don't reflect my views on relative power balance in/outside Core.

This is actually a good idea to put it.
Still, I'd consider the quantitative (= number of new options) and qualitative (= power/versatility of new options) of casters to put them, for instance, from 100 to 300, whereas the fighter in this example would move from 1 to 2.
So, both in absolute and relative terms the casters would pull way, way ahead with the new rules.

[eggynack]

This is actually a good idea to put it.
Still, I'd consider the quantitative (= number of new options) and qualitative (= power/versatility of new options) of casters to put them, for instance, from 100 to 300, whereas the fighter in this example would move from 1 to 2.
So, both in absolute and relative terms the casters would pull way, way ahead with the new rules.
That distance seems very much unlikely. Druids never really get a first level spell better than entangle, or a first level animal companion better than a riding dog, or a 5th level spell better than control winds, or a 9th level spell better than shapechange, or a feat better than natural spell. Wizards never really get a first level spell better than silent image, or a 2nd level spell better than alter self, or a whatever better than whatever. Most of the best options are in core. Not all, but most, and this is far from a tripling in power.

[Gwendol]

Between those two situations, super strong to ridiculous, and not covering their bases to covering their bases, I think that the latter gets the better deal. If you're just covering your bases, that means those bases were uncovered, and in that case, what were you even doing? Not much, is usually the answer.

Not quite: having access to DMM persist, cheap metamagic, tons of spells at all levels, etc, means the casters in principle never, ever, "fail". The mundanes still can't deal with a host of issues. The gap widens and I'm quite sure this can be quantifiably true.

[Amphetryon]

If Wizards can have a solution for everything already, does it impact balance for them to gain additional solutions to problems they could already solve?

This is very well said. Bravo.

[Rubik]

If Wizards can have a solution for everything already, does it impact balance for them to gain additional solutions to problems they could already solve?It's very much like giving an Olympic athlete the ability to run 50% faster, when the quadruple-amputee just gains the ability to walk. Who gains more overall compared to what they could do before?

[Gwendol]

This is very well said. Bravo.

It does if it means they have five different ways of solving the problems, and in some cases a few levels earlier than before.

[The Trickster]

You have two dudes. Dude A has a net worth of 100 million dollars. Dude B has a net worth of 100 dollars.

What happens if you give Dude A 30 million dollars, and give Dude B 10 million?

Well, Dude A is super rich, but he was already rich to begin with. Sure, the extra 30 million is nice, but did he really need it?

Now, what about Dude B? He only got 10 million, but since he only had 100 dollars before, he went from poverty to wealthy. For him, that 10 million makes a huge difference.

Same concept for the tier system/books used debate.

[eggynack]

Not quite: having access to DMM persist, cheap metamagic, tons of spells at all levels, etc, means the casters in principle never, ever, "fail". The mundanes still can't deal with a host of issues. The gap widens and I'm quite sure this can be quantifiably true.
Except casters were already getting a ton of spells at all levels, and that metamagic stuff is merely making better what was already there. It all makes you better at what you were doing already. Mundane fellows, by contrast, move out of their hole of nothingness to some extent. I'm not entirely sure how you can claim some sort of quantifiable truth here either.


It does if it means they have five different ways of solving the problems, and in some cases a few levels earlier than before.
And to this point, Moving from five solutions to ten solutions is a far smaller difference than moving from zero solutions to one solution.

[Eldariel]

I am not quite sure what you mean. Sneak attack affects most monsters and npcs in core. How many monsters are plants, constructs and undead in the MM I? Say, 25%?

Immunity extends to Elementals and Oozes, and Undead are common enough that it's in the 50% region. NPCs can have access to Fortifications-type effects or such spells (Polymorph/Wildshape & al.), as well as creatures with access to such items or magic. On high levels, Sneak Attack is superunreliable vs. anything but the Tarrasque; Penetrating Strike gives you something vs. anybody already.


And hide will work against most monsters of the MM I as well, no darkstalker needed (remember that stuff like tremorsense and blindsense even have limited range).

At those ranges you don't really need Hide as a rule.


Yes darkstalker feat (meaning: you have to spend a feat slot for it, the rogue does not get it for free in non-core!) is nice, but in the non-core arms race there are now things like superior invisbility the wizard gets which is much, much better.

That's irrelevant tho. Rogue relies on hiding to sneak attack, sneak around and such. Wizard doesn't rely on Invisibility as such; they have other ways to stay alive and keep their distance. A buff to an individual trick a Wizard has (at a very high level with normally short duration) is inconsequential compared to a buff to the core functionality of a class.


All of this just boosts eventually their damage output, so they get to one-shot monsters fasters. Possibly (note that non-core monsters sometimes get more absurd power for their CR than even dragons)
Meanwhile, wizards gain methods to boost their damage output (to similar percentages/multiplyers), their divination potential, their social interaction spells and their stealth, and all also at much, much lower levels. Practically all their tier versatility is multiplied, while the barbarian gets just to do damage better.
It is good to be the king. :)

Again, tho, damage is the core functionality of a Fighter or a Barbarian, in addition to zone control. Outside Core, they get to maintain their damage while moving in short enabling them to perform their core functionality consistently. In Core, good luck trying to move around the battlefield to optimal positions as a Fighter; you'll notice you're doing no damage.


I actually, when playing fighters in the old core days (when not many additional rules were available yet), already felt feat-starved. By level 10, I wanted to play a seasoned veteran able to be a decent archer (3 feats gone), do whirlwind attack vs many mooks (5 feats), have tripping and disarming skills (2 more feats) and boost a bit the skills I head (2-3 feats), plus must haves like improved initiative and blind-fight. That was already impossible. Now more feats non-core without more feats overall? Thank you.
It is like getting 100 dollars and a small shop full of interesting things.
And all of a sudden a huge supermarket opens with way more things, but you still have only 100 dollars. Great. (meanwhile, your wizard buddy not only gets to buy in the new supermarket, but everything for a cheaper price! Or just for free)
And being horseshoed into a maniac crashing people into walls or evil setting-specific soldiers to just gain some more d6 damage and more use out of one skill is not really my imagination of what could close a gap to a wizard who gets that, and much, much more. (although, at a second glance, zhentarim soldier at least is a rare case of providing benefits for free to a non-caster).

Your problem is, you're taking worthless feats like Whirlwind Attack (just get Cleave and full attack instead), spending more than one feat on Archery (protip: two-level dip in Ranger = free Rapid Shot), etc. In short, you're running out of feats because you're wasting them. To get all the worthwhile feats in Core you need maybe 10 levels of smart multiclassing.

Then you have another 10 levels where you can't take any feats since none of them do anything worthwhile; you're left taking a ton of Weapon Focuses, skill boosters in skills you have no ranks in so they do anything, Toughnesses and god-knows-what-other-trash.


Granted, ranger and paladin may move up the tiers a bit – but the monk is widely considered a hopeless case, with or without ACFs and dragon material (the latter sources probably not even used in the original tier list).

Monk's quite weak but you can still do certain good things with the prerequisiteless bonus feats, invisibility/blinking and Unarmed Dice (of course, for those you usually go Tashalatora, Unarmed Swordsage or Sacred Fist).


Defensive casting? Really? How often does this come up when the caster can just 5ft step away? Or, in case of reach weapons, use immediate and swift spells for more actions and ways out of a tight situation than a fighter ever gets with the additional rules?
That is not really closing the power gap – on the contrary. Wizards get more things to remain out of the fighter’s ways to attack. (if you intend to consider PvP, or PvNPC caster).
I haven’t seen a caster being disrupted in his spellcasting in a long, long time, core or non-core.
Knowledge Devotion is quite nice, though (but more easily accessible for casters. Again.)

Defensive Casting actually comes up a lot outside Core; any competent warrior will have reach weapon anyways since reach weapon is so much superior to non-reach for all purposes except straight-up damage (even there, the difference isn't major).

So enemy will always need Tumble rather than 5' step, which you can cut away outside Core. In Core, you can just defensively cast Dimension Door even in Grapple and be home free. Outside Core, you just get whacked upside the head & lose your spell if you're even in the reach of a controller warrior.

Yes, there's counterplay available but it's again action and slot expediture from the caster which is far from non-trivial; every Quickened Benign Transposition is a Quickened Glitterdust that was not cast, and outside infinite recursion loops there won't be that many of those available.


Yes, items can provide more help to non-casters in the new optional rules. But what does that mean? The tiers are rated without magic marts in mind iirc.

Magic mart helps the weaker classes tho. Nay, it's absolutely crucial to the point of being a lifeline for lower tier classes to gain access to things their chassis cannot provide through magic items.

Magic Item Compendium Magic Mart offers those abilities at a much more affordable price so the warriors can actually afford them in schedule and be able to match challenges that require flight or teleportation or true sight or whatever midway through. You can even get e.g. Feathered Wings graft to get mundane permanent flight for 10k!


I think that already in core, warriors will be relevant to level 9, so there is no increase of power here. Mounted archers can move and deal damage already in core, as can things like polymorphed pouncing barbarians. There are more methods now (mostly with items), but only meh increase in power here.

They can Polymorph, but not under their own power. It's incredibly hard for a Barbarian to gain access to Polymorph without a Wizard buffing him; and let's face it, a Wizard giving Barbarian access to a core functionality of the class doesn't exactly speak highly for Barbarian.

And yeah, outside Core it's supereasy for warriors; Travel Devotion is a feat for swift action movement, Barbarian 1 Spirit Lion Totem is a one level investment and Snow Tiger Berserker is a feat investment. Sphinx Claws Soulmeld is a two-feat investment. Non-Core Warriors even without ToB get the mobility if they want it, no magic items required.

Mounted Archers, well, Archers already have huge problems in Core and I wouldn't exactly call it an efficient means of dealing damage, especially since it relinguishes the melee control melee types would bring to the table.


Yes, nice, and possibly unnecessary. But still, a multiplication of amazing is multiplied amazing – while the non-casters are just doing their mundane stuff a bit better, and make a bit more use out of the new magic item mart section. Again, that is not closing the gap.

They get better at few fields but by and large, their ability doesn't change overtly much. Sure, they might get better at dealing damage (warriors experience a far sharper growth on that front unless we're talking infinite loops in which case both are of course equal), and some of the superhigh level spells are insanely good, but not to a degree where they couldn't act already.

Of course Wizard is better with more than less sources (that's the nature of extra material that's not complete garbage), but ultimately, the question is if there's a significant peak in the peak power rather than the number of ways to achieve the same objective.


Most of these things I already answered above. The same things that make core warriors suck in that list also apply when adding non-core rules: no flight without magic mart, archery gets pawned hard (and harder) by spells, too few feat slots and skill points to be filled by better feats (while wizard just add some more spellbooks to hold all these nice new things), etc.

Archery gets Force and Splitting which actually goes a long way towards keeping up in damage and negating many of the problematic spells. And yes, you can get flight through Dragonborn of Bahamut or Raptoran at 0 LA if you truly want to go with no magic items.


At least in core a druid cannot do archery better. I bet in non-core there are better druid archers (zen archery feat anyone?), wizard gets even better polymorph forms with MM II+ books, avoid wbl tax for items with cheap new spells that are more powerful for their level in core, persist metamagic clericzillas make fighters (even dungeoncrashers) completely redundant, at lower levels than in the core rules etc.

Warrior-classes keep up in terms of damage and control.


To sum up: Casters with the additional rules get so many earth-shaking powers, it’s crazy. That may not be considered to be a real change to the core setting where they can already earth-shaking things. However, they also get
1) many ways to access completely different powers (like sorcerers getting more spells known, clerics more non-divine spells via domains, druids more spells in general to brush up the worst full caster list in core) and
2) all of the earth-shaking powers at lower levels than before. That is a major difference.
Meanwhile, a 6th level fighter with dungeoncrasher ACF gets exactly what way to fly, detect invisible opponents, fight caster tricks, remain stealthy or gain minions? None at all. You could possibly build even fighters in core that at level 6 get quite close to the dungeoncrasher damage output. Certainly it does not change the game experience for a player wanting to play a fighter that can compete with the druid and his new fleshraker warbeast animal companion.

Honestly, all the new and fancy powers still rarely measure up to the Core powers so while there's more breadth, the actual ceiling doesn't raise much. No non-Core spell competes with Gate/Wish/Shapechange except for Ice Assassin, which is just a buffed Simulacrum.

Yeah, casters get nice tricks and Abrupt Jaunt is amazing and certainly makes low level Wizards among the hardest classes in the game to kill, but the overall effect is just that they require less planning.

[Gwendol]

I'd stay clear of analogies since they rarely contribute to anything meaningful in these discussions: we have a game system that is quite clear and we can enumerate the advantages.
Your numbers are arbitrary, and you use them to prove your point.

I'd stay with looking at the actual game and doing that tells me that outside of core, the non-casting core classes get better at what they can already do, but the classes don't really change. Outside of core, the core casting classes can fill entirely new niches often in many more ways than one. The gap widens.

[eggynack]

I'd stay with looking at the actual game and doing that tells me that outside of core, the non-casting core classes get better at what they can already do, but the classes don't really change. Outside of core, the core casting classes can fill entirely new niches often in many more ways than one. The gap widens.
I think it's the exact opposite. Outside of core, the casting classes get better at what they can already do, which is breaking the game, but the classes don't really change. Outside of core, the non-casting classes can fill entirely new niches, primarily because they weren't filling any niches at all before. The gap shrinks.

[Gwendol]

I think it's the exact opposite. Outside of core, the casting classes get better at what they can already do, which is breaking the game, but the classes don't really change. Outside of core, the non-casting classes can fill entirely new niches, primarily because they weren't filling any niches at all before. The gap shrinks.

Could you perhaps give an example of a core non-casting class closing the gap with a T1-2 caster? Otherwise you're just throwing words to the wind.

[georgie_leech]

Could you perhaps give an example of a core non-casting class closing the gap with a T1-2 caster? Otherwise you're just throwing words to the wind.

Pounce, Travel devotion etc. allows non-casters to move into position and still have a meaningful impact outside of Core, whereas Move->Standard works for most spells just fine.

[eggynack]

Could you perhaps give an example of a core non-casting class closing the gap with a T1-2 caster? Otherwise you're just throwing words to the wind.
As I've mentioned, they're not closing the gap. There is no closing the gap, and the distance between a core fighter and a core wizard isn't that much less than the distance between a core fighter and a non-core wizard. However, it is shrinking. A capable melee guy in a non-core game can potentially kill reasonably strong opponents in a single turn, which is pretty much what you need to not be pointless where melee is concerned. As Eldariel has indicated, a dedicated stealth character can actually hide from pretty much anything, possibly better than most casters, whereas in core hiding is nigh on pointless. Out of core, I'd say that mundane characters occasionally outshine magic within their niche of choice, even if they're useless outside of that. That's what the tier system is all about.

[Gemini476]

I know that I'm probably the only person here that cares about the Wizard/Fighter cagematch, but I did some maths!

I'll maybe post the flowchart later, but here's the gist of it:
If the Wizard wins initiative, he casts Sleep, the Fighter charges, and the turn ends with the Wizard either dead, at 1hp, or at 6hp, and the Fighter either awake or asleep.
If the Fighter wins initiative, he charges, and the Wizard casts defensively if he survives. (Casting defensively is probably the worst mechanic for balancing casters, to be honest.)

For stats, I went with the Elite Array:
Wizard: 15 Int, 14 Con, 13 Dex, 10 Str
Fighter: 15 Str, 14 Con, 13 Dex, 12 Wis

The Wizard has Improved Initiative, and the Fighter is building towards a feat chain of some sort. Core feats won't help him much in tenderizing the Wizard (unless he take Iron Will or something). The Wizard has 4 ranks in Concentration, but no Skill Focus.
They are both naked, but the Fighter has a Greatsword and the Wizard has Mage Armor up and a Scythe. (If you have suggestions for what kind of equipment a level 1 Fighter could have for this, then feel free. Stick under 150gp and avoid consumables. Both also have an extra Human feat and the Fighter has a Fighter bonus feat, so feel free suggesting one. Power Attack means that the Fighter hits 50% of the time but always kills if he hits, but I didn't include that in calculations. It actually lowers his killrate with 3,47%, believe it or not.)

At the end of the turn, these are the statuses of our Schrödinger's Gladiators:
Wizard is dead 54% of the time, and at 1hp 1,5% of the time.
The Fighter is asleep 22% of the time, although that's only counting the times that the Wizard survives.

(This is counting 0hp as effectively dead - I fail to see much that the Wizard could do at 0hp that would lead to him winning.)

So at the second turn, 22% of the time you have an asleep Fighter. The Wizard insta-gibs him with a Scythe 99,26% of the time, leaves him at 0hp 0,49% of the time (dangerous for those 1,3% of matches where the Wizard only has 1hp), and fails to bring him below 1hp 0,25% of the time. If the Fighter survives, he's not likely to survive the DC 18-22 Fortitude save.
The sleeping Fighter survives the Coup de Grace 0,09% of the time, in fact.

If the Fighter is awake, he can attack the Wizard for 2d6+3 damage at +3 to-hit. The Wizard is pretty screwed, but I guess he could go for Grease on the Fighter's weapon followed by beating through his 12hp with 2d4+0 damage and -4 to-hit? The Fighter only has 11 AC, after all, since he came in foolishly expecting the Wizard not to resort to melee combat.


But yeah, from a tentative inspection it looks like the odds favor the Fighter in a one-on-one cage match. Although since the purpose of the Tier List and the like are to compare PC effectiveness vs. somewhat standard challenges and is more focused on the mid-levels (what, 5-15? I heard something like that before), I may have just wasted a few hours doing something that no-one cares very much about.

Not to mention that changing the parameters even slightly changes all of the odds. Take point-buy, for instance: if a Wizard can get 18 Int, he will, but how much does a Fighter prioritize Will? If he puts Wis below 16, he's suddenly worse against the Wizard than he was before with the Elite Array. Or if you make the Wizard use some spell that's a standard action, like Grease. Then you won't get that scenario where he wins initiative, casts Sleep, and gets splattered over the arena floor to the wild cheering of the audience.
Or if the Fighter gets AC 16 and is unhittable by a non-proficient Wizard, or if the Wizard is an Abjurer or Enchanter or Conjurer and has Mage Armor+Shield+Sleep prepared.


The big reason that Sleep is so useful is because it instantly defeats an entire group of enemies; A Wizard can effectively attack four 1HD creatures and defeat them in the same time it takes the Whirling Frenzy Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian to do the same. (In fact, he may do it better: the WPB has 3+Str to hit, sure, but Will saves will be lower than AC.)
While you can use Sleep against a single opponent, it's less useful that way.


Basically, I spent four hours doing absolutely nothing of worth. That's student life for you.

[Gwendol]

Pounce, Travel devotion etc. allows non-casters to move into position and still have a meaningful impact outside of Core, whereas Move->Standard works for most spells just fine.

Pounce is for a specific type of barbarian: one class variant. Travel devotion is nice, but unless you have Turn Undead (i.e. play Cleric or Paladin) it is a once per day use so hardly earth shattering when it comes to altering the power of the mundanes. If you are a cleric however... it allows you to move and full attack multiple times a day.

Paladins are a special case as I noted earlier, and they do actually close the gap somewhat outside of core. But then again they do get spells and TU.

[Eldariel]

So at the second turn, 22% of the time you have an asleep Fighter. The Wizard insta-gibs him with a Scythe 99,26% of the time, leaves him at 0hp 0,49% of the time (dangerous for those 1,3% of matches where the Wizard only has 1hp), and fails to bring him below 1hp 0,25% of the time. If the Fighter survives, he's not likely to survive the DC 18-22 Fortitude save.

Wizard only casts Sleep if he's outside the Charge range. Otherwise he'll close in and cast/ready action to cast Color Spray instead.


Pounce is for a specific type of barbarian: one class variant. Travel devotion is nice, but unless you have Turn Undead (i.e. play Cleric or Paladin) it is a once per day use so hardly earth shattering when it comes to altering the power of the mundanes. If you are a cleric however... it allows you to move and full attack multiple times a day.

Paladins are a special case as I noted earlier, and they do actually close the gap somewhat outside of core. But then again they do get spells and TU.

Any melee can take a level of Barbarian. And Travel Devotion is 1 min/use and you can take it multiple times for extra uses.

[Gwendol]

As I've mentioned, they're not closing the gap. There is no closing the gap, and the distance between a core fighter and a core wizard isn't that much less than the distance between a core fighter and a non-core wizard. However, it is shrinking.

Shrinking =/= closing in your vocabulary?

Yes, a rogue can hide better in a non-core game, but as with most of these options for mundane characters it comes at a cost. Usually in the forms of feats or ACF's. Casters meanwhile don't need to make that choice: their abilities just keep piling up, hence a widening of the gap.

[Gwendol]

Wizard only casts Sleep if he's outside the Charge range. Otherwise he'll close in and cast/ready action to cast Color Spray instead.



Any melee can take a level of Barbarian. And Travel Devotion is 1 min/use and you can take it multiple times for extra uses.

DOH! Don't know what I read there on the duration, sorry about that. However, taking the feat multiple times means you can't take other feats. The same goes for taking levels of barbarian. You do that at the cost of not taking levels in another class. The casters typically don't have to make those considerations.

[eggynack]

Pounce is for a specific type of barbarian: one class variant.
Well, yeah. Out of core, if you want to be good at stuff as a mundane guy, you have to do some pretty specific things. In core, if you want to be good at stuff as a mundane guy, you have just about zero options, with the closest thing to effectiveness being the horizon tripper, requiring several different classes and a prestige class, and not even coming close to the out of core character.

Edit:
Shrinking =/= closing in your vocabulary?
I usually think of closing as representing the gap no longer existing. I may be mistaken though.


Yes, a rogue can hide better in a non-core game, but as with most of these options for mundane characters it comes at a cost. Usually in the forms of feats or ACF's. Casters meanwhile don't need to make that choice: their abilities just keep piling up, hence a widening of the gap.
Casters already had many of these costless options in core. The rogue just had no options at all for the most part.

[georgie_leech]

DOH! Don't know what I read there on the duration, sorry about that. However, taking the feat multiple times means you can't take other feats. The same goes for taking levels of barbarian. You do that at the cost of not taking levels in another class. The casters typically don't have to make those considerations.

Again, going out of core is what gives them the option to even make that consideration in the first place. No, it isn't as powerful as the ability to make your own demi-plane, but the ability to move and do relevant damage is more important to the Fighter's shtick than Genesis is to the Wizard's. Genesis doesn't help the Wizard solve problems it couldn't before, but the boost to combat mobility does let the Fighter engage foes without worrying about being hit harder in return for daring to move up next to something that can full attack.

To put this another way, what new problems are the casters able to deal with outside of core that they had no means of dealing with within?

[Gwendol]

To put this another way, what new problems are the casters able to deal with outside of core that they had no means of dealing with within?

Not getting hit in combat starting at level one, alternatively getting to previously impossible places (Abrupt Jaunt)
PW Pain: kills "everything" you encounter at levels 1-3
DMM: metamagic very, very cheaply
MM II-IV a host of new creatures to summon, call or turn into, giving the caster lots of new options

etc

This is a ridiculous excercise: for divine casters all spells published for 3.5 are available at no cost. To claim that being able to move and full attack somehow makes up for that is not even debatable. Pounce isn't even a factor until level six, at which point the cleric can DMM persist: how is that even remotely closing or shrinking the gap?

I know perfectly well that being able to fill a nish, and build a non-caster character to fill it efficiently gets easier outside core, but then one must realize that casters also get the tools to fill that niche with a standard action, and likely quite a few more.

[eggynack]

This is a ridiculous excercise: for divine casters all spells published for 3.5 are available at no cost. To claim that being able to move and full attack somehow makes up for that is not even debatable. Pounce isn't even a factor until level six, at which point the cleric can DMM persist: how is that even remotely closing or shrinking the gap?
Of course it makes up for it, and for one simple reason. For reasons that are beyond me, and that are rather inexplicable in retrospect, melee characters were nearly entirely unable to do that before. They had nothing. Now, they have a little. It's like some sort of infinite increase. Casters could do a billion things before, and they can do seven billion things now, but the distance between nothing and something will always be a greater one, because more everything isn't nearly as important.

[Ivanhoe]

I agree with Gwendol. It is not really only the spells themselves which get better, but also what you can do with the core ones with non-core rules (e.g. persist, craft contingent spell etc).

Even so:


That distance seems very much unlikely. Druids never really get a first level spell better than entangle, or a first level animal companion better than a riding dog, or a 5th level spell better than control winds, or a 9th level spell better than shapechange, or a feat better than natural spell. Wizards never really get a first level spell better than silent image, or a 2nd level spell better than alter self, or a whatever better than whatever. Most of the best options are in core. Not all, but most, and this is far from a tripling in power.

Let me check…
A better first level druid spell at level 1 than entangle (a situational area control)?
Aspect of the wolf – read: wild shape at 1st level.
Camouflage – hey, now I can scout better as the wolf I turned into than the rogue in our group can ever hope to . At level 1, not 5.
Winged Watcher- flying for 1 round as a swift action? Yes, please! (at level 1!!! That is what I meant with “casters get stuff even earlier”)
Spider hand – scout for 1 minute at level 1, or frightener, or debuffer.
Do I need to go on?

Then, a better first level animal companion.
just use the 1st level spell “enrage animal” on your riding dog and it now not only is better than the fighter in melee, but also better than the barbarian (without the fatigue drawback of the rage effect, of course!). The trip ability of the riding dog alone is boosted incredibly with this, making trip for the dog a real combat-changing option (instead of a nice potential, but rarely succeeding add-on in core).
And who cares whether at level 1 there happens to be hardly a better animal companion? Fleshraker is just 3 levels away, and there is always the natural bond feat that completely catapults animal companions to new stratospheres.
Not to mention that not only will the non-core druid gain so many power boosts, but his animal companion as well.

Better non-core 5th level druid spells than control winds?
Bite of the weretiger? Epic STR enhancement bons, two fighter feats, AC boosts etc (combine with wildshape for more fun) – this is a spell that makes a warrior / fighter obsolete, not “control winds”.
Owl’s insight? Another epic-level stat boost. The implications of +5 more WIS bonus to DCs, etc. are incredible. Also, Zen archery says hello to the non-core archer fighter.
But for flavour and area affecting similar to control winds, you can just take the 4th level spell boreal wind and get cold damage to everyone in the vast area on top (which can wipe out whole army columns!). It is a typical example of that non-core spells often just disregard what the good spells in core do at higher levels.
(those splatbooks sell just so much better with these gems everywhere…)

Better spell for druids than shapechange?
None - only that now the druid can choose from 5 MM plus other material instead of just 1. That’s a 400+% power boost.

Better feats for druid than natural spell feat?
Probably none, but the other feat slots get filled so much more powerfully with things like greenbound summoning. If the non-caster warrior guy does not already feel unnecessary at low levels, this is just brokenly crazy. And again, the spell power you can use with natural feat just gets multiplied, just like shapechange.

Better 1st level spell than silent image?
Power word pain, benign transposition, nerveskitter are certainly in a similar league – filling the other spell slots for the wizard = more versatility and power non-core. Master’s touch is another typical low-level non-core offender that enters the turf of non-caster class abilities (like heroics etc).
And the ACF abrupt jaunt alone (several times per day even!) at level 1 is clearly more powerful than silent image.
Again, a multiplication of power.

Alter self?
Same as shapechange – get otherworldly feat for outsider forms (without LA adj), or just take the many humanoid flying/whatever forms available. Dwarven Ancestor is a particularly absurd power boost for a wizard in non-core environment.

As you can see, eggynack, for every core element of casters, there is a boost, or better replacement, or early version in non-core.
You would really have to very selectively add rules to core to provide non-casters with a steeper power addition (e.g. just adding ToB, and even then…). Adding everything just leaves the non-casters behind in the dust.


If Wizards can have a solution for everything already, does it impact balance for them to gain additional solutions to problems they could already solve?

Yes, if they get those solutions earlier, with less costs, and also in such ways that there are less obstacles for their solutions.:smallwink:

[Killer Angel]

Of course it makes up for it, and for one simple reason. For reasons that are beyond me, and that are rather inexplicable in retrospect, melee characters were nearly entirely unable to do that before. They had nothing. Now, they have a little. It's like some sort of infinite increase. Casters could do a billion things before, and they can do seven billion things now, but the distance between nothing and something will always be a greater one, because more everything isn't nearly as important.

This makes only meleers more fun to play, but has nothing to do with "reducing the gap".
If casters' options outside core are just the ice on the cake, why do we have builds with ice assassin, shadesteel golem, DMM, persist spell, orb of, matamagic reducers, celerity, abrupt jaunt, wings of cover, and so on?
When your fighter goes to "i fight with a sword" to "Now I have a gun!", and the caster goes to "I have a sopwhit camel" to "I have a B-2 Spirit Stealth", you can say that the improvement for the fighter is more significative (and i can concede that), but I can say that the gap isn't diminished at all.

[Gwendol]

That's an opinion you have. It is contrasted by the actual rules of the game and the options made available outside of Core.

For every example of a non-caster class gaining ground in tiers, the casters gain that and then some.

Orb spells, for example, don't exist in Core. I'd say that their existence allow for more easily dropping evocation as a school and thus make a specialized wizard even less painful a choice.

[Amphetryon]

That's an opinion you have. It is contrasted by the actual rules of the game and the options made available outside of Core.

For every example of a non-caster class gaining ground in tiers, the casters gain that and then some.

Orb spells, for example, don't exist in Core. I'd say that their existence allow for more easily dropping evocation as a school and thus make a specialized wizard even less painful a choice.

I have yet to see how anything posted on either side of this debate was other than opinion; classifying one side of the debate as such does not strengthen the other side's position, to my mind.

[eggynack]

A better first level druid spell at level 1 than entangle (a situational area control)?
Aspect of the wolf – read: wild shape at 1st level.
Camouflage – hey, now I can scout better as the wolf I turned into than the rogue in our group can ever hope to . At level 1, not 5.
Winged Watcher- flying for 1 round as a swift action? Yes, please! (at level 1!!! That is what I meant with “casters get stuff even earlier”)
Spider hand – scout for 1 minute at level 1, or frightener, or debuffer.
Do I need to go on?
None of those is even close to entangle. Like, at all. Entangle can wipe out entire encounters a lot of the time, and most of those spells aside from spider hand are pretty mediocre. Aspect of the wolf shuts down casting for mediocre fighting, scouting isn't really as strong as shutting down an encounter, and neither is flight for a round. It's different stuff, but it's nowhere near better stuff.


Then, a better first level animal companion.
just use the 1st level spell “enrage animal” on your riding dog and it now not only is better than the fighter in melee, but also better than the barbarian (without the fatigue drawback of the rage effect, of course!). The trip ability of the riding dog alone is boosted incredibly with this, making trip for the dog a real combat-changing option (instead of a nice potential, but rarely succeeding add-on in core).
Except that spell isn't all that good, especially as it requires you to concentrate. It's just a kinda mediocre buff spell.


And who cares whether at level 1 there happens to be hardly a better animal companion? Fleshraker is just 3 levels away, and there is always the natural bond feat that completely catapults animal companions to new stratospheres.
Not to mention that not only will the non-core druid gain so many power boosts, but his animal companion as well.

Me, primarily because this is the level where being a fighter is most important.



Better non-core 5th level druid spells than control winds?
Bite of the weretiger? Epic STR enhancement bons, two fighter feats, AC boosts etc (combine with wildshape for more fun) – this is a spell that makes a warrior / fighter obsolete, not “control winds”.
Owl’s insight? Another epic-level stat boost. The implications of +5 more WIS bonus to DCs, etc. are incredible. Also, Zen archery says hello to the non-core archer fighter.
But for flavour and area affecting similar to control winds, you can just take the 4th level spell boreal wind and get cold damage to everyone in the vast area on top (which can wipe out whole army columns!). It is a typical example of that non-core spells often just disregard what the good spells in core do at higher levels.
(those splatbooks sell just so much better with these gems everywhere…)
Some of these are at least reasonable, but control winds is an absolutely ridiculous spell that allows you to lock down massive areas, and wipe out armies and towns alike. Crazy stuff. Boreal wind is great, but it's never going to do anything on the scale of hurricane or even tornado force winds.



As you can see, eggynack, for every core element of casters, there is a boost, or better replacement, or early version in non-core.
You would really have to very selectively add rules to core to provide non-casters with a steeper power addition (e.g. just adding ToB, and even then…). Adding everything just leaves the non-casters behind in the dust.
As you can see, most of these things you're citing are not really exceeding the power of the core options. You're always going to get more out of more books, and that's great, but it's just not as meaningful of a difference. Casters get stronger in absolute terms, but mundanes get stronger in relative terms.

[Gemini476]

Wizard only casts Sleep if he's outside the Charge range. Otherwise he'll close in and cast/ready action to cast Color Spray instead.
Thanks for the input! I already realized that you could just 5ft step instead of casting defensively (bringing fighter drowsiness up 4% to 26%), but I had completely forgotten which core level one spells were good save-or-loses.

That means the Figher just kills the Wizard... 33,8%-ish of the time? And the Fighter is unconscious... 25,8%-ish? Yeah, 26%. So the fight is over within one turn 60% of the time, which is 20 procent units lower than my previous estimate with Sleep.

During the second round the Fighter cannot charge, so has -2 to-hit compared to last time. If he hits the Wizard (45% chance) he'll kill him 97,22% of the time, or 100% of the time if the Wizard was previously injured. The Wizard, however, can 5ft-step back and cast another Color Spray that hits 55% of the time, and instantly "kills" the Fighter.

Yeah, the Fighter is at a disadvantage if it stretches beyond one round. If both Color Sprays miss, though, the Wizard is a sitting duck. That's 20,25% of the time.

I don't feel like doing the maths, but it's pretty clear that Color Spray is an improvement in close-range combat.

Chance of being killed in second round:
1hp from previous round: 0,3% total
6hp from previous round: 5,6% total
Sleep'd in second round: 11,6% total

Wizard killed within two rounds: 39,7%
Fighter defeated within two rounds: 37,4%
Chance that it proceeds to round three mudwrestling: 22,9%

Apparently the odds within two rounds are 40:37 favoring the Fighter???

...Yeah, I dunno. I'm sure that there's some better way to use three spell slots at level one than Mage Armor+Color Spray+Color Spray. Also, now I need to properly give them both armor and weapons so that I can figure out what the chance of the Wizard winning the melee is. (Third round Touch of Fatigue, yea or nay?)

[eggynack]

This makes only meleers more fun to play, but has nothing to do with "reducing the gap".
If casters' options outside core are just the ice on the cake, why do we have builds with ice assassin, shadesteel golem, DMM, persist spell, orb of, matamagic reducers, celerity, abrupt jaunt, wings of cover, and so on?
Because that stuff is generally better than what they would have otherwise, obviously. Non-core options absolutely make casters better, even if that improvement doesn't substantially change the degree of reality altering that's occurring.

When your fighter goes to "i fight with a sword" to "Now I have a gun!", and the caster goes to "I have a sopwhit camel" to "I have a B-2 Spirit Stealth", you can say that the improvement for the fighter is more significative (and i can concede that), but I can say that the gap isn't diminished at all.
I don't think it's diminished by that much, but I think it is diminished by a little. At least the guy with the gun can shoot something.

I have yet to see how anything posted on either side of this debate was other than opinion; classifying one side of the debate as such does not strengthen the other side's position, to my mind.
Indeed. I'm not entirely sure if this debate can ever reach a place beyond that point.

[Gwendol]

I have yet to see how anything posted on either side of this debate was other than opinion; classifying one side of the debate as such does not strengthen the other side's position, to my mind.

Please, I've done that in nearly every post, as has almost every one else pointing out the obvious that the casters pull ahead in the tier race outside of core. Here's an example from the very post you replied to:


Orb spells, for example, don't exist in Core. I'd say that their existence allow for more easily dropping evocation as a school and thus make a specialized wizard even less painful a choice.

[eggynack]

Please, I've done that in nearly every post, as has almost every one else pointing out the obvious that the casters pull ahead in the tier race outside of core. Here's an example from the very post you replied to:
That orb fact is a fact, but the part where you value that fact more than the fighter's access to dungeoncrasher is an opinion. We all have a general idea of the improvements provided to casters and non-casters in splat books. There's just no easy objective way to evaluate those improvements relative to each other.

[Flickerdart]

The reason that people drop evocation isn't because Evocation spells suck. It's because blasting sucks, and Evocation is mostly blasting. Orbs suck less, but they're still blasting. You have a party fighter for dealing stacks of damage to single targets, and wasting spells on it is actually bringing you closer to their level.

[Killer Angel]

Because that stuff is generally better than what they would have better, obviously. Non-core options absolutely make casters better, even if that improvement doesn't substantially change the degree of reality altering that's occurring.

I don't think it's diminished by that much, but I think it is diminished by a little. At least the guy with the gun can shoot something.


Fair enough, i think.

[Ivanhoe]

Since there were some doubts that in core you can move and full attack:
Ride and mounted archery, polymorph and pounce, taking LA+ races, surprise/charge and win initatiive/full attack, dimension door by caster in the group to a square adjacent to the opponent, etc etc.

So there isn’t really a big gain for the fighter types outside of core. They can do it better – but what kind of tier-like impact does that have when at the same level the druid now has an animal companion completely outclassing the fighter? While flying already at level 1, getting more spells, getting more stealth, getting more everything? And all that without buying items or being subject to feat tax.


Immunity extends to Elementals and Oozes, and Undead are common enough that it's in the 50% region. NPCs can have access to Fortifications-type effects or such spells (Polymorph/Wildshape & al.), as well as creatures with access to such items or magic. On high levels, Sneak Attack is superunreliable vs. anything but the Tarrasque; Penetrating Strike gives you something vs. anybody already.

No – check the core monsters in the SRD if you do not believe me. A quick guestimate reveals it is even only 15%, not counting when you include humanoid npcs in city adventures. The npcs rarely at the respective rogue levels will have polymorph, wildshape and fortification effects up.
At the very high levels, outsiders and dragons (most common foes throughout all levels, and at CR 17-20 even more common than undead/plants/constructs) still are vulnerable to sneak attacks. And then the rogue can also do something useful with UMD and scouting in core.


At those ranges you don't really need Hide as a rule.

Sorry, I do not understand what you want to say here.


That's irrelevant tho. Rogue relies on hiding to sneak attack, sneak around and such. Wizard doesn't rely on Invisibility as such; they have other ways to stay alive and keep their distance. A buff to an individual trick a Wizard has (at a very high level with normally short duration) is inconsequential compared to a buff to the core functionality of a class.

The core functionality of the wizard with just the core rules is limited at low levels via
1) number of spells
2) low AC/hp/saves
Both of which get boosted sky-high in non-core environments with extra actions, earlier actions, more actions and more powerful actions.
The rogue? Yes, gets some skill tricks and now can sneak 33% more monsters (not oozes and elementals btw). A single spell of the wizard (superior invisibility) is now better than his whole scouting skills. That does not happen in core at least.


Again, tho, damage is the core functionality of a Fighter or a Barbarian, in addition to zone control. Outside Core, they get to maintain their damage while moving in short enabling them to perform their core functionality consistently. In Core, good luck trying to move around the battlefield to optimal positions as a Fighter; you'll notice you're doing no damage.

See above on the core options of fighters wishing to full attack and move.


Your problem is, you're taking worthless feats like Whirlwind Attack (just get Cleave and full attack instead), spending more than one feat on Archery (protip: two-level dip in Ranger = free Rapid Shot), etc. In short, you're running out of feats because you're wasting them. To get all the worthwhile feats in Core you need maybe 10 levels of smart multiclassing. Then you have another 10 levels where you can't take any feats since none of them do anything worthwhile; you're left taking a ton of Weapon Focuses, skill boosters in skills you have no ranks in so they do anything, Toughnesses and god-knows-what-other-trash.

Full attack and cleave will not make my enlarged fighter at level 10 attack everyone within a 50ft diameter at highest attack bonus with trip, high damage etc. effects. So it is not a “worthless” feat. It just depends on the situation. And with more feat options coming up, the limited number of bonus feats for the fighter just hurt harder, the more you get outside core.
There are no feats outside core that really completely are like the core feats, only better in every way. There are more like additional combinations – but mostly cost a lot of feats to make them fly.

And when adding mulit-class it gets even worse, since that is one of the areas in core where non-casters had an advantage (since casters lost often some of their caster levels). Now, with so many prestige classes advancing spellcasting and providing even more power on top and simulating non-caster abilities, non-core just hands the most powerful things to casters, and not non-casters. I have no idea why.


Monk's quite weak but you can still do certain good things with the prerequisiteless bonus feats, invisibility/blinking and Unarmed Dice (of course, for those you usually go Tashalatora, Unarmed Swordsage or Sacred Fist).

Interesting that you bring up tashalatora. Instead of a Prestige class to advance non-caster class abilities for casters, you now only need a feat to do so non-core.


Defensive Casting actually comes up a lot outside Core; any competent warrior will have reach weapon anyways since reach weapon is so much superior to non-reach for all purposes except straight-up damage (even there, the difference isn't major).

When there are so many things added non-core for wizards and other casters to avoid melee, even at level 1 (benign transposition and abrupt jaunt for instance), how can non-castser-chances come up more often than in core? In core, they also wield reach weapons and may be able to force the caster more often to make a concentration check. Buying Mageslayer for one feat slot to do something the wizard has now so many things for free(or more easily) to counter? Does not sound like closing a gap to me.
It is an arms race the non-casters cannot win.


So enemy will always need Tumble rather than 5' step, which you can cut away outside Core. In Core, you can just defensively cast Dimension Door even in Grapple and be home free. Outside Core, you just get whacked upside the head & lose your spell if you're even in the reach of a controller warrior.

Abrupt jaunt in grapple. Heart of the water as 3rd level spell (up more often and easily than even freedom of movement). Somewhere there once was even a thread how a wizard with an octopus familiar and things like babau slime or some such could be a better grappler than all non-casters already at low levels.
This is what I try to say all the time: With non-core rules, the casters get more power more easily and way earlier, increasing the distance to non-casters.


Yes, there's counterplay available but it's again action and slot expediture from the caster which is far from non-trivial; every Quickened Benign Transposition is a Quickened Glitterdust that was not cast, and outside infinite recursion loops there won't be that many of those available.
It would be a slot expenditure that mattered if there were not so many ways to get even more slots and spells per level non-core.


Magic mart helps the weaker classes tho. Nay, it's absolutely crucial to the point of being a lifeline for lower tier classes to gain access to things their chassis cannot provide through magic items.

I only wonder if what they get in non-core items really makes even up what non-casters get as non-core items. And again, the tier system as far as I know it abstracts form items and just looks at the class abilities.


Magic Item Compendium Magic Mart offers those abilities at a much more affordable price so the warriors can actually afford them in schedule and be able to match challenges that require flight or teleportation or true sight or whatever midway through. You can even get e.g. Feathered Wings graft to get mundane permanent flight for 10k!

Everything the warriors can get also benefits casters. And a flight method for 10 k (bronze griffon) was already available in core (not around so long, but with added bonus of fighting power and mounted combat options).


They can Polymorph, but not under their own power. It's incredibly hard for a Barbarian to gain access to Polymorph without a Wizard buffing him; and let's face it, a Wizard giving Barbarian access to a core functionality of the class doesn't exactly speak highly for Barbarian.

That is what I meant with that tiers abstract from items.
And again, core already allows move and full attack – adding more methods in this limited aspect of gameplay cannot really outweigh the examples of non-core caster overpowerdness that I provided.


And yeah, outside Core it's supereasy for warriors; Travel Devotion is a feat for swift action movement, Barbarian 1 Spirit Lion Totem is a one level investment and Snow Tiger Berserker is a feat investment. Sphinx Claws Soulmeld is a two-feat investment. Non-Core Warriors even without ToB get the mobility if they want it, no magic items required.

Two-feat investment – what does that mean for a barbarian? Spending nearly a third of the available feats of the character to get something like pounce. Is there any mechanism anywhere in the non-core rules that hands a spell like, say, power word pain for the cost of “caster loses a third of his spells learned per day”? No.


Mounted Archers, well, Archers already have huge problems in Core and I wouldn't exactly call it an efficient means of dealing damage, especially since it relinguishes the melee control melee types would bring to the table.

Archers do quite OK in core, as do mounted archers. There is a whole “mongol” kind of fighting tactics often considered as cheesy.


They get better at few fields but by and large, their ability doesn't change overtly much. Sure, they might get better at dealing damage (warriors experience a far sharper growth on that front unless we're talking infinite loops in which case both are of course equal), and some of the superhigh level spells are insanely good, but not to a degree where they couldn't act already.

Of course Wizard is better with more than less sources (that's the nature of extra material that's not complete garbage), but ultimately, the question is if there's a significant peak in the peak power rather than the number of ways to achieve the same objective.

Again, we should not focus on the high levels, but on the low levels – where non-core rules simply make casters outclass everyone so much faster.


Archery gets Force and Splitting which actually goes a long way towards keeping up in damage and negating many of the problematic spells. And yes, you can get flight through Dragonborn of Bahamut or Raptoran at 0 LA if you truly want to go with no magic items.

I do not think that the Raptoran flies so well at low levels, but granted, more races for play help the mundanes, too.
Force and splitting means again relying on items to do your class trick (not relevant for tier discussion).


Warrior-classes keep up in terms of damage and control.

No, I do not think so. Look at the enhanced druid animal companion. Or at power word pain.


Honestly, all the new and fancy powers still rarely measure up to the Core powers so while there's more breadth, the actual ceiling doesn't raise much. No non-Core spell competes with Gate/Wish/Shapechange except for Ice Assassin, which is just a buffed Simulacrum.

Yeah, casters get nice tricks and Abrupt Jaunt is amazing and certainly makes low level Wizards among the hardest classes in the game to kill, but the overall effect is just that they require less planning.

Planning is a non-game element (meaning skill of play). Outside the box abrupt jaunt just means a vastly bigger power jump than that for non-casters at level 1.
And the fact that no non-core spell is there to replace gate/wish/shapechange does not mean anything, since those spells themselves get their power multiplied by non-core means, as
Gate can now caller even weirder/more powerful creatures with more ex/su/sp abilities
Wish can now emulate even more spells of lower level
And shapechange (as I already mentioned above) gets whole books of more monsters with all their new singular ex and su abilities.

Again, to sum up, caster tiers get boosted more in non-core than non-casters.

[Eldariel]

Since there were some doubts that in core you can move and full attack:
Ride and mounted archery, polymorph and pounce, taking LA+ races, surprise/charge and win initatiive/full attack, dimension door by caster in the group to a square adjacent to the opponent, etc etc.

Ride and mounted archery isn't a melee full attack. Ranged attacks don't require movement anyways. The prob with ranged attacks is that they give up damage and the melee control that bringing a melee has. You can't be a frontliner if you're ranged.

Polymorph is not a non-caster power. Only way for them to get it is by Use Magic Device and even that's expensive for a 4th level spell. Casters can use it, at the cost of their own action. Yeah, it's possible but not a non-caster power. You can't take feat "Polymorph" or even buy item "Polymorph at will" since neither exists. You need a spellcaster casting spell "Polymorph" on you. Dimension Door is the exact same. You're not getting full attacks, you're reliant on your caster wasting actions to enable you to do your basic functionality instead of being able to do your functionality on your own.

Surprise charge and full attack relies on surprise and winning initiative and guess what? Is still a full attack short of what you'd get with Pounce (with Pounce you can Partial Charge for full attack on surprise round). So it doesn't accomplish anything in addition to being quite unlikely.

In short, none of your proposed options work for this purpose. Why? Well, 'cause it's impossible to do so in Core with the non-casters' own powers.


Other than that, I'll just mention this on Hiding:
Rogue's Hiding isn't worse than Superior Invisibility out of Core. You still can't True Seeing through Hiding, you can True Seeing through Superior Invisibility. And yes, Core Hiding fails so many tests that it's just not reliable. It's only doable in wide open areas and there, range penalties on Spot-checks mean you don't really need a specialist to do it.

[eggynack]

But what kind of tier-like impact does that have when at the same level the druid now has an animal companion completely outclassing the fighter?
Approximately one. Fighters out of core are tier four, and are listed as such in the tier system. Paladins go up a tier or so, depending on how much optimization you provide. Monks are kinda weird, but they're at the very bottom of tier five in core, possibly verging on tier six, and they're maybe in the middle of the tier out of core. Barbarians maintain their tier, largely because they were at a higher tier already, but the value of a dip is increased by an incredible amount. Rangers face the same issue, but they might be propelled to tier three with sword of the arcane order, and they definitely stretch higher with mystic ranger.

Basically, it's physically impossible for casters to experience a greater tier difference, because there's nowhere higher for them to go. Non-casters see a bump of zero to two tiers, and casters see a bump of zero tiers. The fact that your proposed solutions for replacing pounce tend to be onerous and horrible is also problematic.

[Ivanhoe]

None of those is even close to entangle. Like, at all. Entangle can wipe out entire encounters a lot of the time, and most of those spells aside from spider hand are pretty mediocre. Aspect of the wolf shuts down casting for mediocre fighting, scouting isn't really as strong as shutting down an encounter, and neither is flight for a round. It's different stuff, but it's nowhere near better stuff.

No, entangle cannot “wipe out” entire encounters a lot of the time. It is highly situational in that it needs plants in the area – that will not apply for most dungeon encounters, for example. Or on the seas, or in a desert, or in a mountain region. Even if it works, it will just make opponents entangled – a good debuff, but far from winning an encounter.

Scouting in general is essential for a group to gain the upper hand in an encounter. And the flying option? Again: it is a fly speed as class ability at level 1! For escaping it is highly useful. Or flying out of a trap. Or jail or chains (note the tiny size). Being able to turn into a bird at level 1 is incredibly more versatile than entangle.

Aspect of the wolf at level 1 is not really shutting down much of your remaining casting. And what more casting do you need? You can scout with it, be less MAD for combat situations, get 50ft speed, you look like a wolf (and are a wolf for the useful purposes). You could even get a flying animal companion as a scout and have that become a wolf alongside you as well.
As I said, it is basically wildshape 4 levels earlier.


Except that spell isn't all that good, especially as it requires you to concentrate. It's just a kinda mediocre buff spell.

Mediocre? Giving you at 1st level with a first-level-spell the barbarian’s key class ability on a platter?
When you see the power of such spells as mediocre, of course you believe that non-core offers little to druids.


Me, primarily because this is the level where being a fighter is most important.

If you think that keeping a fighter relevant for levels 1-4 is the best thing going for non-core power boosts of mundanes, then I do not think that this is evidence for them getting any closer to casters in power.


Some of these are at least reasonable, but control winds is an absolutely ridiculous spell that allows you to lock down massive areas, and wipe out armies and towns alike. Crazy stuff. Boreal wind is great, but it's never going to do anything on the scale of hurricane or even tornado force winds.

I do not think that you interpret the control winds spell correctly. At the level a druid gets it the wind maximum is to strong winds from no wind conditions. That is way inferior to boreal wind.
Also, a major drawback of the spell is that it takes quite long for the spell to reach its power – at those levels 5 rounds of combat can make a big difference.
Definitely control winds is no match for boreal wind (a lower-level spell even), or epic level stat boosts.


As you can see, most of these things you're citing are not really exceeding the power of the core options. You're always going to get more out of more books, and that's great, but it's just not as meaningful of a difference. Casters get stronger in absolute terms, but mundanes get stronger in relative terms.

I think I have provided plenty of examples why that is not the case, and also now shown that your core spell interpretations may be too powerful.


Approximately one. Fighters out of core are tier four, and are listed as such in the tier system. Paladins go up a tier or so, depending on how much optimization you provide. Monks are kinda weird, but they're at the very bottom of tier five in core, possibly verging on tier six, and they're maybe in the middle of the tier out of core. Barbarians maintain their tier, largely because they were at a higher tier already, but the value of a dip is increased by an incredible amount. Rangers face the same issue, but they might be propelled to tier three with sword of the arcane order, and they definitely stretch higher with mystic ranger.

Basically, it's physically impossible for casters to experience a greater tier difference, because there's nowhere higher for them to go. Non-casters see a bump of zero to two tiers, and casters see a bump of zero tiers.

This may be so, but only because in the present grading they cannot move up in tiers. And they should definitely move up even more than the non-caster classes.

Or, the tier system is for non-core stuff as well, and core the casters should move down a tier to reflect the boosts they received from the many non-core options. But that would certainly not reflect well what a core caster can do with, say, 9th level spells.


The fact that your proposed solutions for replacing pounce tend to be onerous and horrible is also problematic.

They are neither onerous nor horrible, but entirely feasible, have been done many times (on these and other boards, or my own game experience), and worked well - even having the advantage of being independent of being able to charge like pounce ACFs.

[Eldariel]

They are neither onerous nor horrible, but entirely feasible, have been done many times (on these and other boards, or my own game experience), and worked well - even having the advantage of being independent of being able to charge like pounce ACFs.

Output is the problem here. See, for instance:
Pounce: 1 Full-Round Action = double move plus melee full attack (with a turn if you have the Twisted Charge skill trick)

Polymorph: 1 Standard Action + 4th level slot from Wizard & 1 Full-Round Action = double move plus melee full attack

Dimension Door: 1 Standard Action + Turn End + 4th level slot from Wizard & 1 Full-Round Action = move 400' & melee full attack

Surprise Round + Full: Two turns! You not only need to get a surprise round and win the initiative, you're still spending two turns on one turn's results.


I'm not gonna cover ranged full attacks here since the whole point is to perform a melee attack for the express purpose of maintaining melee threat and maximizing your damage. The whole point of the movement is to be able to approach the enemy to assume a control position if you don't kill/for other enemies.

Principally, the problem is that you're spending another character's turn to the same effect you'd only spend your own turn for normally. If you also need that Black Tentacles or Solid Fog that turn, you sure would love to let the Wizard have his Standard Action for useful purposes. All your listed options consume about twice the party resources a Pounce would.

[eggynack]

No, entangle cannot “wipe out” entire encounters a lot of the time. It is highly situational in that it needs plants in the area – that will not apply for most dungeon encounters, for example. Or on the seas, or in a desert, or in a mountain region. Even if it works, it will just make opponents entangled – a good debuff, but far from winning an encounter.
There's no expressly stated limitation of that variety. A carried shrub could easily suffice in even the most difficult of scenarios. When it works, it wipes out encounters, and it works a lot.


Scouting in general is essential for a group to gain the upper hand in an encounter. And the flying option? Again: it is a fly speed as class ability at level 1! For escaping it is highly useful. Or flying out of a trap. Or jail or chains (note the tiny size). Being able to turn into a bird at level 1 is incredibly more versatile than entangle.
It's a reasonable spell, and it has some uses, but the limited duration means that you're not getting anywhere, and you're spending one of your few spells in a day for very little real impact on the situation. Fast low impact spells are for when you're at high level and your first level spells aren't cutting it in terms of actual game changing. As for gaining the upper hand in an encounter, you gain the upper hand by tossing out an entangle. Not by using one of your few spells to possibly gain the element of surprise.

Aspect of the wolf at level 1 is not really shutting down much of your remaining casting. And what more casting do you need? You can scout with it, be less MAD for combat situations, get 50ft speed, you look like a wolf (and are a wolf for the useful purposes). You could even get a flying animal companion as a scout and have that become a wolf alongside you as well.
As I said, it is basically wildshape 4 levels earlier.
It shuts down all of your remaining casting. I don't druid to become a worse version of a fighter. It's a great spell for animal-cheese purposes, but not that great outside of that. I don't really wild shape at level five either, for the casting purposes, and when I do at level six, it's certainly not for crappy fighting.



Mediocre? Giving you at 1st level with a first-level-spell the barbarian’s key class ability on a platter?
Yeah? That's really not impressive. Druids are better than barbarians, and sacrificing one of your few spells to become a marginally better beat stick isn't exactly the best way to spend your time.


When you see the power of such spells as mediocre, of course you believe that non-core offers little to druids.
I think that non-core offers a ton to druids. It's just that many of the best options exist in core, just as many of the other best options exist out of core. For example, do you really think I'm going to be casting any core second level option when stuff like kelpstrand, blinding spittle, or mass snake's swiftness exists? It seems unlikely. You haven't even listed the best spells in the categories I've set forth, like blizzard or call avalanche at 5th level spells. It's just that druids can function perfectly well in core, and operate better under restrictions than any mundane guy can.


If you think that keeping a fighter relevant for levels 1-4 is the best thing going for non-core power boosts of mundanes, then I do not think that this is evidence for them getting any closer to casters in power.
If they're relevant for more levels, that's a push in the right direction.


I do not think that you interpret the control winds spell correctly. At the level a druid gets it the wind maximum is to strong winds from no wind conditions. That is way inferior to boreal wind.
Also, a major drawback of the spell is that it takes quite long for the spell to reach its power – at those levels 5 rounds of combat can make a big difference.
Control winds sets no limitation on the amount you can increase its strength in a round. You move right from no wind to windstorm instantly, which completely shuts down any ranged attacks and pushes enemies around with high efficiency. It's also not that hard, even in core, to pick up efficient CL boosters like karma beads or a pale orange ioun stone. That represents potentially tornado force winds one level after you get the spell.


They are neither onerous nor horrible, but entirely feasible, have been done many times (on these and other boards, or my own game experience), and worked well - even having the advantage of being independent of being able to charge like pounce ACFs.
Many of your plans rely on caster aid, which isn't exactly speaking well of those plans, and mounted archery suffers in its own fashion. I think Eldariel covered this stuff pretty well.

[Ivanhoe]

Ride and mounted archery isn't a melee full attack.

Which I did not maintain. I said “full attack”.


Ranged attacks don't require movement anyways. The prob with ranged attacks is that they give up damage and the melee control that bringing a melee has. You can't be a frontliner if you're ranged.

True. However, I have mentioned quite a few other possibilities to move and full attack in melee in core.


Polymorph is not a non-caster power. Only way for them to get it is by Use Magic Device and even that's expensive for a 4th level spell. Casters can use it, at the cost of their own action. Yeah, it's possible but not a non-caster power. You can't take feat "Polymorph" or even buy item "Polymorph at will" since neither exists. You need a spellcaster casting spell "Polymorph" on you. Dimension Door is the exact same. You're not getting full attacks, you're reliant on your caster wasting actions to enable you to do your basic functionality instead of being able to do your functionality on your own.

What is the big problem here when magic mart is supposed to help non-casters, anyway?


Surprise charge and full attack relies on surprise and winning initiative and guess what? Is still a full attack short of what you'd get with Pounce (with Pounce you can Partial Charge for full attack on surprise round). So it doesn't accomplish anything in addition to being quite unlikely.

It accomplishes what people said was impossible in core: move and full attack. That pounce can do more is relevant for non-core boosts to mundanes, true (I also agree to your subsequent post on the improved action economy with pounce as an ACF). But basically whether you get pounce with an ACF, a race or polymorph (2 out of these 3 possible in core) is only a technical matter. And with polymorph any object you can also get pounce in core without needing extra actions.


In short, none of your proposed options work for this purpose. Why? Well, 'cause it's impossible to do so in Core with the non-casters' own powers.

But they all work. As shown.
Or, in core, just get a LA race that has pounce for higher-level play.
Yes, you get more options non-core to achieve that.

And coming to think about it… how can it be that you focus on this very secondary combat ability as providing the big thing in non-core for mundanes, while I have already illustrated what casters get at low levels even: flying, changing into other forms, sky-high AC with alter self, huge boosts to initative, huge boosts to animal companions, huge boosts to stealth and basically everything where mundanes are supposed to shine.


Other than that, I'll just mention this on Hiding:
Rogue's Hiding isn't worse than Superior Invisibility out of Core. You still can't True Seeing through Hiding, you can True Seeing through Superior Invisibility. And yes, Core Hiding fails so many tests that it's just not reliable. It's only doable in wide open areas and there, range penalties on Spot-checks mean you don't really need a specialist to do it.

So…you say that core hide isn’t worse than superior invisibility and then say it more or less useless in core? This does not compute.
And anyway…
Either hide is a powerful skill that equals superior invisibility as you said (still, just one spell out of many of the wizard compared to 25% of the rogue’s skill slots).
Or it is a worthless ability which is even made (alongside move silently) more redundant by superior invisibility.
In both cases in non-core: advantage casters.

[Eldariel]

Hide is powerful with Darkstalker and Hide in Plain Sight. Without them it's horribly unreliable, particularly in dungeon environment. Hide beats True Seeing, something Superior Invisibility can't brag. Out-of-Core, Hide is better than Invisibility. In Core, it's at best comparable, with a much greater chance of failure and much greater investment.

Pounce races in Core unfortunately have way too high LA to be competitive options even in high level games.

[eggynack]

What core pounce race are we talking about here, anyway?

[Karnith]

What core pounce race are we talking about here, anyway?
Probably the easiest way to get it on a PC would be via some form of Lycanthropy; the minimum ECL bump looks to be +5, for an afflicted Were-Leopard.

[eggynack]

Probably the easiest way to get it on a PC would be via some form of Lycanthropy; the minimum ECL bump looks to be +5, for an afflicted Were-Leopard.
If that's what's being used, I'd have to say that it fits under my definitions of both onerous and horrible.

[Karnith]

If that's what's being used, I'd have to say that it fits under my definitions of both onerous and horrible.
You only get Pounce in animal form that way, too. There are also playable creatures like the Lammasu (ECL 12, but at least it gets some Cleric casting) that get it, and I guess you could get yourself PaO'd into something with Pounce (a Sphinx or a Leonal or something, depending on your original type)?

The options for getting Pounce aren't very good, is what I'm getting at. Compared to what you actually get (or, more importantly, don't get) from core-only mundane levels, though, some methods might be worth it anyway.

[eggynack]

The options aren't very good, is what I'm getting at.
Indeed so. It is a tragic fate for our noble fighter, trapped e'ermore between the world of pouncelessness, and the world of having levels to work with. He can only wish to someday be freed from this curse, for there are portents of change on the horizon. Perhaps someday.

[Ivanhoe]

If that's what's being used, I'd have to say that it fits under my definitions of both onerous and horrible.

Actually who cares about more ways to get pounce for mundanes when the non-core druid just summons an animal at level 1 and with greenbound summouning feat it can cast a wall of thorns?
That is truly onerous and horrible, and definitely will win most encounters, not the highly situational entangle (which when you bring your own plant will mean the caster gets entangled as well).

[eggynack]

Actually who cares about more ways to get pounce for mundanes when the non-core druid just summons an animal at level 1 and with greenbound summouning feat it can cast a wall of thorns?
That is truly onerous and horrible, and definitely will win most encounters.
You need speak with plants to pull that off, which likely means not level one. Also, seriously, nothing the mundane will do will ever compete with anything a druid does. Ever. Only the relative growth rate of mundane classes can ever hope to compete.


Not the highly situational entangle (which when you bring your own plant will mean the caster gets entangled as well).
There's no real indication of that. There's no real indication of anything, really. The spell has no targeting restrictions, and no explicit preexisting plant requirement, as exists in plant growth.

[Ivanhoe]

You need speak with plants to pull that off, which likely means not level one.

No, you do not. SNA specifies "It attacks your opponents to the best of its ability". If a 1/day ability can, say, shut down best a mob of 10 goblins, the greenbound wolf will do ecactly that with wall of thorns and not just bite/trip one of them. It is its most powerful ability, a 5th level combat spell. It does not need the druid to tell it what is best to use.
Oh, and the summoned wolf could also use entangle - so this template alone turns SNA into a much better spell than entangle.:smallbiggrin:


Also, seriously, nothing the mundane will do will ever compete with anything a druid does. Ever. Only the relative growth rate of mundane classes can ever hope to compete.

As I said, in core the fighter, for instance, can be a better archer. The rogue can out-stealth the druid at low levels. The barbarian can out-damage the animal companion. Not any more in non-core.
(an entertaining thread on the non-core powers of an animal companion can be found here. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=9724.0)
In core, the non-casters still contribute with a druid in the group, at least for the lower levels. In non-core they are made completely redundant.


There's no real indication of that. There's no real indication of anything, really. The spell has no targeting restrictions, and no explicit preexisting plant requirement, as exists in plant growth.

The spell says in the area entry: "Plants in a 40ft radius spread" (not just the area, so plants need to be present.)
And the text then says: "Grasses, weeds, bushes, and even trees wrap, twist, and entwine about creatures in the area or those that enter the area, holding them fast and causing them to become entangled." And not "Grasses, weeds - or whatever kind of plants - come into existence and then wrap, twist..."
It is also discernible in that the spell is transmutation, not conjuration in nature. So already present plants change, but they do not come into existence.

...

Overall, is it really so surprising with 90% of new material devoted to spellcasters and loads of powerful stuff added, that the tier gaps widens so considerably?
I think that several posters, not just me, have shown many examples that show how much more casters gain out of non-core: earlier and better powers, that also more directly get access to non-caster niches.

[Lans]

PW Pain: kills "everything" you encounter at levels 1-3


Except for things immune to mind affecting, with regeneration, above cr encounters, and the fact it doesn't really do anything for several rounds giving the monsters plenty of time to whack at your face.

[georgie_leech]

There's no real indication of that. There's no real indication of anything, really. The spell has no targeting restrictions, and no explicit preexisting plant requirement, as exists in plant growth.

Eh, strictly speaking it does indicate that the spell might work differently based on the plants that actually do the entangling. Of course, depending on the area, tree roots are practically everywhere; just about the only place you won't have access them is the desert, and there you've almost certainly got cacti anyway, so now your Entangle has a strong argument for doing extra piercing damage, possibly even a mild drug/poison if the cactus juice gets in open wounds (from the STR check to break free).

[Killer Angel]

Basically, it's physically impossible for casters to experience a greater tier difference, because there's nowhere higher for them to go. Non-casters see a bump of zero to two tiers, and casters see a bump of zero tiers.

Yes and no. That's why sometimes we talk about "high T1", or "low T3": we need more layers.
And casters need only one ability or a spell poorly written, to effectively improve a tier: leaving aside excesses ala sarrukh, we cannot really consider on the same level a wizard and an incantatrix, or a druid and a planar sheperd.
In pathfinder, sorcerers need only Paragon Surge, to jump from T2 to T1.

[Story]

In core, the non-casters still contribute with a druid in the group, at least for the lower levels. In non-core they are made completely redundant.


That depends a lot on relative optimization of course. I remember seeing a heavily optimized Ninja take out two Mariliths in one round at level 11.

[Gemini476]

That depends a lot on relative optimization of course. I remember seeing a heavily optimized Ninja take out two Mariliths in one round at level 11.

Also, an ubercharger is probably more useful than an animal companion. So that's a thing.

The Druid is going to want to just fly around spellcasting rather than get into combat, since AC is generally pretty bad for wildshape animals.

[Ivanhoe]

That depends a lot on relative optimization of course. I remember seeing a heavily optimized Ninja take out two Mariliths in one round at level 11.

Now that sounds way more interesting- do you have more information on that build?
It's that I'd love to see a good example of a non-caster narrowing the tier gap to tier 1 casters. More ways to charge and pounce simply doesn't cut it in my opinion. A ninja at level 11 taking out two CR 17 creatures in a single round? That is more like it!

[Gwendol]

Except for things immune to mind affecting, with regeneration, above cr encounters, and the fact it doesn't really do anything for several rounds giving the monsters plenty of time to whack at your face.

Yes, hence citation marks. Still, at those levels PWPain covers a lot of threat outside the undead.

[Kennisiou]

Yes, hence citation marks. Still, at those levels PWPain covers a lot of threat outside the undead.

Oozes, animated objects, and a number of plants are all low CR. In fact, if I recall correctly the vast majority of plants and oozes are decidedly low CR, meaning that if you're ever going to see one it's usually early on.

[Gemini476]

Now that sounds way more interesting- do you have more information on that build?
It's that I'd love to see a good example of a non-caster narrowing the tier gap to tier 1 casters. More ways to charge and pounce simply doesn't cut it in my opinion. A ninja at level 11 taking out two CR 17 creatures in a single round? That is more like it!

Eh, a Marilith only has 216hp. An 11th level ninja has Sudden Strike +6d6. That's still just four attacks and +24d6 damage if all of them hit, though, and that maxes out at +144 damage/full attack.

I guess maybe poison or some special weapons or something? I guess Craven also adds +44 damage/Full Attack (effectively what, +3d6-ish?), but that isn't quite enough. Oh, and the Marilith is immune to poison.

I guess if you're a Rokugan Ninja you could do 1 Dex damage for every die of Sneak Attack you would have done, but the Marilith has 19 Dex.

Or maybe he was a 6th level Shadow Sun Ninja. There's too many ninjas floating around here, is what I'm saying.


I'd appreciate finding out how he did so as well. The Marilith might just be a big brute, but it's good at being a big brute.

[eggynack]

No, you do not. SNA specifies "It attacks your opponents to the best of its ability". If a 1/day ability can, say, shut down best a mob of 10 goblins, the greenbound wolf will do ecactly that with wall of thorns and not just bite/trip one of them. It is its most powerful ability, a 5th level combat spell. It does not need the druid to tell it what is best to use.
Oh, and the summoned wolf could also use entangle - so this template alone turns SNA into a much better spell than entangle.:smallbiggrin:
It's not really an attack in the technical sense, is the issue. It's another action, as defined as the sort of action you need communication for. You can't determine anything about what specific actions a summoned monster will take unless you communicate with it.

Edit:

As I said, in core the fighter, for instance, can be a better archer.
I'm pretty sure that fighters are better archers out of core too. What does a druid even do with archery that's all that great? I mean, you can blast I suppose, but that's a different thing I think.

[Urpriest]

It's not really an attack in the technical sense, is the issue. It's another action, as defined as the sort of action you need communication for. You can't determine anything about what specific actions a summoned monster will take unless you communicate with it.


You can't determine what actions it will take, sure. So it will do what it does naturally. Why wouldn't a Greenbound Wolf naturally use Wall of Thorns? Presumably that's part of its normal hunting strategy when faced with enemies that outnumber its pack.

[Amphetryon]

Edit:
I'm pretty sure that fighters are better archers out of core too. What does a druid even do with archery that's all that great? I mean, you can blast I suppose, but that's a different thing I think.
It's entirely likely I'm remembering this less than perfectly, but I think I've seen arguments that Venomfire alone can make a Druid a more than competent archer (with all the standard caveats about resistances and immunities).

[eggynack]

You can't determine what actions it will take, sure. So it will do what it does naturally. Why wouldn't a Greenbound Wolf naturally use Wall of Thorns? Presumably that's part of its normal hunting strategy when faced with enemies that outnumber its pack.
How it works really depends on how you define an "attack", I think. If you use the definition where you need an attack roll, then you definitely can't get wall of thorns without speak with plants. If you use the invisibility definition, where an attack is anything that includes a foe as a target, or within its area, then it presumably will work. This might therefore be one of those ambiguous DM adjudication things.

[Story]

I don't remember the complete build, but it involved Ninja/Rogue/Fighter/Master Thrower and relied on Maiming Strike to do massive amounts of CHA damage with shruikens. He also had Dragonfire Strike for +1d6 SS and +1d6 SA and was using Master Thrower abilities to double every attack. Allowing Maiming Strike to apply to Sudden Strike is technically a houserule, but it's not that outrageous.

[Ivanhoe]

I don't remember the complete build, but it involved Ninja/Rogue/Fighter/Master Thrower and relied on Maiming Strike to do massive amounts of CHA damage with shruikens. He also had Dragonfire Strike for +1d6 SS and +1d6 SA and was using Master Thrower abilities to double every attack. Allowing Maiming Strike to apply to Sudden Strike is technically a houserule, but it's not that outrageous.

This sounds quite OK. However, you would need 48d6 sneak damage to convert into the CHR 24 of a marilith - and do that twice. In one round. Against an AC of 34 (at will unholy aura likely up). And possibly an illusory marilith with at will project image.
Somehow I doubt that this is really the build that defeated the two CR 17 opponents in one round.

[Story]

Well a Ninja 2/Rogue 5/Fighter 1/Master Thrower 3 would have BAB 8, 2d6 SS and 4d6 SA, so 3 CHA damage per attack. With Palm Throw, that's doubled to 6 and Two With One Blow means that it hits both at once. 1 attack in the surprise round plus 3 attacks in the first round with Haste (we prebuffed) and they each take 24 damage, enough to go down. I'm not sure if that's exactly what happened, but it was probably something similar.

[Ivanhoe]

Well a Ninja 2/Rogue 5/Fighter 1/Master Thrower 3 would have BAB 8, 2d6 SS and 4d6 SA, so 3 CHA damage per attack. With Palm Throw, that's doubled to 6 and Two With One Blow means that it hits both at once. 1 attack in the surprise round plus 3 attacks in the first round with Haste (we prebuffed) and they each take 24 damage, enough to go down. I'm not sure if that's exactly what happened, but it was probably something similar.

I am not quite sure how this ninja got the surprise round against an opponent with true seeing up all the time, and two chances (two mariliths) at +31 spot vs the hide skill. But assuming that happened, there is still the issue of actually hitting AC 34 with BAB 8. Maybe some wraithstrike wand?
Two with one blow is a great ability, but is also somewhat situational - the mariliths needing to be adjacant.

[Augmental]

Everything the warriors can get also benefits casters. And a flight method for 10 k (bronze griffon) was already available in core (not around so long, but with added bonus of fighting power and mounted combat options).

The bronze gryphon can be used twice per week for 6 hours per use, and the gryphon it summons can be killed with ranged attacks. The feathered wings can be used all day, every day.


Two-feat investment – what does that mean for a barbarian? Spending nearly a third of the available feats of the character to get something like pounce.

Or he just takes the Spirit Lion ACF and gains pounce at level 1.

[Komatik]

Honestly, I think the best way to keep it simple, while also maintaining balance and a sense of fun, is to ban everything except XPH and TOB. Pull from Core only what you need to play, with none of the classes or spells, only some of the feats, and the items. ToB is straightfoward except for multiclassing, XPH a little more complicated but much simpler than the mess of spell levels, spell slots, spells known, and spells prepared that most casters have (and with nice and condensed rules, no need for PHB2, HoH, CArc, and PHB like is needed for the three easy Vancian casters).

That sounds... really good, actually? Everyone's competent (XPH has only 2 base classes, right?), and the flavour of casters being genuinely supremely powerful and scary is still very concretely there in gameplay terms too, but with the worst excesses contained. I like it.

[Story]

I am not quite sure how this ninja got the surprise round against an opponent with true seeing up all the time, and two chances (two mariliths) at +31 spot vs the hide skill. But assuming that happened, there is still the issue of actually hitting AC 34 with BAB 8. Maybe some wraithstrike wand?
Two with one blow is a great ability, but is also somewhat situational - the mariliths needing to be adjacant.

Hiding wasn't a problem since he had a Collar of Umbral Metamorphisis and a hide check in the high 30s. But in this case, we dimension doored in. I don't remember how his attack bonus got so high, but he was basically autohitting everything. I do know that I had GMW'ed the shruikens, most likely +4, and he was also hasted. There were probably some other buffs too. I'm still not sure how it could be possible even with the buffs, so he probably did have some way of making them touch attacks.

P.S. The AC is actually 29 due to being flatfooted.

[eggynack]

I think I may have solved the entangle problem. First, some assumptions, because that whole argument never really resolved all that well. There need to be plants of some variety, and they need to be within the area of the entangle field. I think that's a reasonable representation of the views of the folks who think that entangle is limited. Anyway, having plants on your person is definitely not the best here, because you end up entangled, and throwing the plants isn't great, because using up actions isn't a good thing. Thus: plant-dog. Instead of attaching the plants to yourself, you attach them to your friendly riding dog, possibly by intertwining the plants in his armor, and possibly by tying a bush to his back. The method is somewhat irrelevant for now. So, the question is, how do you get the dog out of the radius of the entangle? The answer is, you don't.

While the positioning won't always be ideal, having your riding dog standing next to your opponents in the field might actually be a good thing, as the point is to have a beat stick kill the opponents while they're stuck, so you may as well start the dog off within the field. Moreover, the riding dog will pretty much always be next to enemies anyway, because their entire function is to attack, and it's not like the entangle has to be perfectly centered on the dog, so you have quite a bit of flexibility. This is obviously less good than having a whole grassy area to work with, as that allows you to decide whether your dog will be in the entangle, but it's really not that much worse, and it's a good enough spell that the downside still places it among the best spells of its level. I am of the belief that plant-dog, who is presumably the successor to catdog, is a workable solution.

[TuggyNE]

No – check the core monsters in the SRD if you do not believe me. A quick guestimate reveals it is even only 15%, not counting when you include humanoid npcs in city adventures.

Since SRD number-crunching is pretty much my bag, I felt like fact-checking this. CR 1-20, you get 28 elementals, 33 undead, 17 constructs, 7 plants, 5 oozes, and 6 swarms out of 497 monsters, or about 19.3%.

I am more than a little surprised by the result, but there you go.

[Flickerdart]

Since SRD number-crunching is pretty much my bag, I felt like fact-checking this. CR 1-20, you get 28 elementals, 33 undead, 17 constructs, 7 plants, 5 oozes, and 6 swarms out of 497 monsters, or about 19.3%.

I am more than a little surprised by the result, but there you go.
How do these map across the range (both as entities as as a percentage of monsters at that CR)? I'd guess that the vast majority of the crit-immune guys start ramping up seriously around CR3-5, and taper off about 10 levels later.

Of course, the problem there is that raising undead, building constructs, and binding elementals are some of the most popular ways for BBEGs to get together huge mobs, so they're quite likely to persist into the higher levels even without having many high-CR ones.


That sounds... really good, actually? Everyone's competent (XPH has only 2 base classes, right?), and the flavour of casters being genuinely supremely powerful and scary is still very concretely there in gameplay terms too, but with the worst excesses contained. I like it.
I did a "Core is banned" game once. Incarnate, warlock, and binder joined some ToB dudes and a psion, and it was a pretty enjoyable romp all in all.

[Rubik]

Since SRD number-crunching is pretty much my bag, I felt like fact-checking this. CR 1-20, you get 28 elementals, 33 undead, 17 constructs, 7 plants, 5 oozes, and 6 swarms out of 497 monsters, or about 19.3%.

I am more than a little surprised by the result, but there you go.That 19.3% doesn't factor in all the templated undead that pop up everywhere. They seem to be one of the most popular forms of minions, which isn't surprising, given how cheap they are to animate and how easy they are to control, and a lot of them are self-perpetuating. Undead A kills commoner B and shortly thereafter you have undead C, both of which go on to kill commoners D-X and spawn undead Y-ZZ.

[Story]

This sounds quite OK. However, you would need 48d6 sneak damage to convert into the CHR 24 of a marilith - and do that twice. In one round. Against an AC of 34 (at will unholy aura likely up). And possibly an illusory marilith with at will project image.
Somehow I doubt that this is really the build that defeated the two CR 17 opponents in one round.

I got the build information from the player. It turns out he had Ninja 2/Rogue 3/Fighter 2/Master Thrower 4 with the Halfling Rogue substitution level making up the extra +1d6 SA.

Including buffs, his attack bonus was +27/+27/+27/+22 against an AC of 29, so it's not that improbable that he hit every time.

The attack bonus isn't broken down, but here's what I calculated
BAB: +9
Dex: +6
Size: +1
Point Blank Shot: +1
Weapon Focus Shruiken: +1
Halfling Racial: +1

Buff spells:
Greater Magic Weapon: +4
Haste: +1
Prayer: +1

That gives +25, so there must be another +2 in there somewhere that I missed. At any rate, it's definitely possible.

In case you were wondering how he got a +4 GMW, I was playing an Anima Mage Wizard. So base CL 10, Persisted Suffer The Flesh +5, Create Magic Tatoo +1 gives a CL of 16. At least I think I did, I don't remember the details any more.

[Ivanhoe]

I got the build information from the player. It turns out he had Ninja 2/Rogue 3/Fighter 2/Master Thrower 4 with the Halfling Rogue substitution level making up the extra +1d6 SA.

Including buffs, his attack bonus was +27/+27/+27/+22 against an AC of 29, so it's not that improbable that he hit every time.

The attack bonus isn't broken down, but here's what I calculated
BAB: +9
Dex: +6
Size: +1
Point Blank Shot: +1
Weapon Focus Shruiken: +1
Halfling Racial: +1

Buff spells:
Greater Magic Weapon: +4
Haste: +1
Prayer: +1

That gives +25, so there must be another +2 in there somewhere that I missed. At any rate, it's definitely possible.

In case you were wondering how he got a +4 GMW, I was playing an Anima Mage Wizard. So base CL 10, Persisted Suffer The Flesh +5, Create Magic Tatoo +1 gives a CL of 16. At least I think I did, I don't remember the details any more.

That is ... quite impressive :smallcool:
Some comments/questions:

Where did the third attack at full BAB come from?
The other +2 to attack probably was some morale bonus effect (say, from a potion of heroism)
With every attack being doubled, plus applying to both marilith, and including the surprise round, I now count a total of 40d6 sneak damage or 20 CHR damage on each marilith. Or was there also the craven effect adding another 1d6 for 5d6 sneak damage per hit?
I forgot about the flat-footed, so AC 29 it is for the poor mariliths!
That said, afaik, the two in one blow class ability triggers a -4 to each attack, so your player probably really was quite lucky on the rolls.


Now, linking this to this thread's theme, is this mundane class boost in non-core really so significant vs core?
Let us consider a similar, but core, build.

Halfling 11th level rogue
Feats: TWF, EWP shuriken, point blank shot, rapid shot, WF shuriken (feat taken at rogue level 10 for spc ability)
Attack bonus: 8 BAB, 6 DEX, 1 Halfling, 1 WF, 1 haste, 4 enhance on cold iron holy shuriken (again a 11th level cleric buddy, using things like prayer beads and death knell for GMW), 1 prayer, 2 potion of good hope, 1 point blank shot, 1 size, -2 rapid shot, -2 TWF.
This yields a total of +22/+22/+22/+22/+17.
Each attack does 1d2 +4 (enhance) + 2 (good hope) +1 (prayer) +1 (PBS) + 2d6 (holy) +6d6 (sneak) damage, for a total average of 38 damage.
There is probably a similar chance to the non-core build (with the -4 penalty from two with one blow included) to land these total 6 attacks (including surprise round) and then get 1 marilith down (and note that the non-core build got the second marilith only due to these monsters standing next to each other which is not really reliable).

So, we see about a doubling of effectiveness/power with core to non-core.*

I bet, though, that we will see a much steeper power rise when we compare a, say, level 11 core wizard to a level 11 non-core wizard build when going against two mariliths.

@eggynack: good idea to solve the entangle problem!

*Edit: considering that one marilith is CR 17 or 6 lvl above the rogue, we can also state at least that non-casters like this rogue are already "competent" in core.

[Emperor Tippy]

The core tiers are pretty much the same as the all sources tiers. The non casters might jump up a tier but even that is pretty iffy for most of them.

As for power levels of core vs. all sources, the gap shrinks significantly. Most of a Wizard, Cleric's, or Druids Tier 1 power comes from the PHB. It's the core spell list that is, hands down, the most powerful in the game.

Sure, outside of core you find the occasional gem of significant power but the five most powerful Wizard spells in the game are Shapechange, Wish, Gate, Ice Assassin, and Simulacrum. Note that only one of those is non core. When you go for the ten most powerful about the only non core spells you end up picking up are Celerity and Genesis.

If you actually just totally cut the PHB spell list from the game you pretty much drop all of the big three down to Tier 2 and push the Sorcerer down to borderline Tier 3.

Non casters experience an absurdly massive power boost when all sources are allowed. As in dozens to hundreds of times more powerful and capable than they would be if core only. The gain for casters is significantly less massive in relative terms even if, on an absolute scale, the gain was greater.

Nothing a Fighter can do can compete with, say, Ice Assassin but then again nothing the Fighter (core or non core) can do could compete with Shapechange or Simulacrum either. The wizard just got a greater variety in his list of methods of utterly dominating the fighter.

[Ivanhoe]

Hi Tippy - what would you say how an 11th level core wizard would perform vs the two mariliths, compared to what he can pull with all sources allowed? (original scenario being that the wizard has the surprise round within 30ft of the adjacent marilitihs, plus wins the initiative).

Is there really such a low power gain as you outlined?

Note also that the spells you referred to are part of the very high level game, while non-core spells like celerity are already available for the (much more often played) lower levels.
It is not that 9th level spells in core are not already uber. They are.*
It is that with non-core material added, many ultra-powerful effect are already available to casters at much lower level. Thus, more overall (= level 1-20) power gain than for the non-caster classes.

EDIT: And even so...consider shapechange. Core, you get one MM to choose from. Non-core, you get 4-5 times more monsters to choose from, and quite a few see a power creep in the new MM (over CRed and all that).
That is, only in quantitatve terms, a power boost of x4

[TuggyNE]

That 19.3% doesn't factor in all the templated undead that pop up everywhere.

It actually includes about a dozen zombie and skeleton applications. Those are the most common ones in Core, I feel confident in saying.

[eggynack]

@eggynack: good idea to solve the entangle problem!

Thanks. It's always nice to solve things that were considered problems for druids in the past.

[Ivanhoe]

Thanks. It's always nice to solve things that were considered problems for druids in the past.

True. But that is a far cry from saying that entangle gimping your AC somewhat can stand up in comparison to summoning a greenbound CR 3 creature at level 1 able to cast 5th level spells.:smallwink:
Non-core druid vs core druid already at level 1 is far ahead.

EDIT: thanks also for the improved calculations of MM I monsters immune to sneak attack. Originally I felt it was 25%, then I calculated 15%, now revised to around 20%. Supporting the notion that rogue sneak attacks are useful most of the times in core. Templates that make immune or not to sneaks could be added to all the monsters, so proportions likely woudn't change (and the standard SRD lyanthropes plus skeletons/zombies were already included).

[Amphetryon]

True. But that is a far cry from saying that entangle gimping your AC somewhat can stand up in comparison to summoning a greenbound CR 3 creature at level 1 able to cast 5th level spells.:smallwink:
Non-core druid vs core druid already at level 1 is far ahead.

And both are better equipped to handle the encounters typical to the game - immediately and in the long haul - than any T4 or below Character. Giving a Fighter, for example, the Zhentarim and Dungeoncrasher ACFs allows him to handle many more encounters typical to the game.

The non-core Druid isn't generally handling more encounters than before, he's just doing it differently, and possibly more efficiently. Both the Greenbound CR3 creature and the Entangle spell are essentially encounter-enders against a wide swath of encounters appropriate to Level 1 play.

[Killer Angel]

EDIT: And even so...consider shapechange. Core, you get one MM to choose from. Non-core, you get 4-5 times more monsters to choose from, and quite a few see a power creep in the new MM (over CRed and all that).
That is, only in quantitatve terms, a power boost of x4

Indeed. And the same reasoning applies to Gate.

I would also add a thing: the huge improvements for meleers, outside core, usually are not represented by additional abilities / feats / similar things, but by the new classes.
The improvement for the paladin, it's not Battle Blessing. It's the Crusader.
When you go outside core, you have little reasons to use the core non-caster classes, because there are better replacements, despite the boosts given to core meleers by splatbooks.

[eggynack]

And both are better equipped to handle the encounters typical to the game - immediately and in the long haul - than any T4 or below Character. Giving a Fighter, for example, the Zhentarim and Dungeoncrasher ACFs allows him to handle many more encounters typical to the game.

The non-core Druid isn't generally handling more encounters than before, he's just doing it differently, and possibly more efficiently. Both the Greenbound CR3 creature and the Entangle spell are essentially encounter-enders against a wide swath of encounters appropriate to Level 1 play.
Also, with greenbound produced wall of thorns, area is something of an issue. You're talking about two 10 foot cubes at most, which is a significantly smaller area than what entangle grants, and you can't even be sure that the two cubes will be placed in an optimal way. It's a pretty big disadvantage compared to entangle, which grants a 40 foot radius placed at your discretion. Wall of thorns is a better spell than entangle, but it's not an utter destruction.

[Ivanhoe]

And both are better equipped to handle the encounters typical to the game - immediately and in the long haul - than any T4 or below Character. Giving a Fighter, for example, the Zhentarim and Dungeoncrasher ACFs allows him to handle many more encounters typical to the game.

I doubt that the zhentarim dungeoncrasher is really so much better at handling encounters compared to the core fighter. These two ACF just add somewhat more damage in some situations and provide boost to intimidate use (also vs groups). Adding more non-core feats it could be a power boost of x2, similar to the difference of the rogue builds above.
But with casters, we are talking about a much higher multiplier.


The non-core Druid isn't generally handling more encounters than before, he's just doing it differently, and possibly more efficiently. Both the Greenbound CR3 creature and the Entangle spell are essentially encounter-enders against a wide swath of encounters appropriate to Level 1 play.

But...what exactly about entangle "ends" an encounter? It provides a good debuff, but not more. Creatures can move out of the entangle area with a full round action even if they failed their save (note that the mobile dog plant is not really holding opponents tethered). And if they make their save, they can leave the area more easily.
Also, in case they have ranged attacks, the encounter is definitely not over.

Also, let us not forget that a non-core druid at level 1 could get other power boosts (e.g. ability to fly), which have already been mentioned. And with each level, the gap between the two druids widens more (AC boosts, greenbound lasting longer and more, better PrC like planar shepherd etc.)

EDIT: good hint about the caster level of the greenbound wolf. What is it? It has HD 2, so it should be second level. Or will the caster level be higher due to higher CR or even Level adjustment?
Still, even two 10ft cubes would be tough enough. Quadruples every level the druid gains.

[eggynack]

But...what exactly about entangle "ends" an encounter? It provides a good debuff, but not more. Creatures can move out of the entangle area with a full round action even if they failed their save (note that the mobile dog plant is not really holding opponents tethered). And if they make their save, they can leave the area more easily.
They can move with a full round action if they make a DC 20 strength or escape artist check. Not many enemies can do that consistently. Even if they do move, the can still only move half their speed, which means that an enemy with a 30 foot move speed starting in the center of the entangle will take three rounds to fully exit it, and will have a chance to be caught again in subsequent rounds. As for plant-dog, he actually does keep the enemy's tethered to some extent, because a riding dog has a reasonable chance of tripping an enemy, thus knocking them prone, and keeping the enemy trapped for something like infinity. It's a really good spell.


Also, in case they have ranged attacks, the encounter is definitely not over.
Perhaps, but entangle is a pretty great ranged debuff too. Between the -2 on attack rolls, and -4 to dexterity, an entangled enemy is facing a total -4 to their ranged attack rolls. Not enough for a total shut down, but it's enough to be meaningful.

Edit:
Good hint about the caster level of the greenbound wolf. What is it? It has HD 2, so it should be second level. Or will the caster level be higher due to higher CR or even Level adjustment?
It's two. Per the rules on spell like abilities "If no caster level is specified, the caster level is equal to the creature’s Hit Dice."


Still, even two 10ft cubes would be tough enough. Quadruples every level the druid gains.
I don't see how you got to this number. You see increases only when either the quantity of animals summoned increases, or when their HD increases. At level three, that would mean either 1.5 times as many cubes, from either a 3 HD creature or 1.5 wolves, or twice as many cubes, from the 4 HD dire bat. I think you get another 1.5 times at level five, when you get dire wolves for 6 HD, or perhaps 1d4+1 wolves for 7 HD. This is nowhere close to a quadrupling with every level.

[Augmental]

Also, let us not forget that a non-core druid at level 1 could get other power boosts (e.g. ability to fly)

The ability to fly for one round. Even if entangle isn't an encounter ender, it still lasts for a whole minute.

[Ivanhoe]

Entangle is good. There is no controversy about that.
But it has limits and will most often not end encounters. There are simply too many caveats:

It has its limits in case your dog does not carry a plant with it (there are many encounters happening in such areas as already shown).
In case a dog carries a plant around the entangled opponents are not bound to one place and there exist no rules for a dog opposing their movement. Very DM-dependent (some DMs may even take issue that a carried plant will only be able to entangle adjacent foes, and not a 40ft radius - since the spell does not say that plants grow or come into existance, only that those plants present will entangle).
There is a reflex save. Those that make it will be able to move out of the area on their turn, thus just lose a round of actions (good, but not ending encounters).
Those that fail their save will still have some chance to come back into combat (ranged at -4 is better than nothing; or they might make that STR 20/escape artist check).
Then, the spell risks also catching some of your group in it, in particular when the opponents went first (surprise or won initiative) and are already in melee, not to mention the plant dog animal companion greatly reduced in efficiency with this spell (to a similar degree as the opponents, in fact. So the core druid essentially debuffs himself/impairs his own class abilities with entangle).


Now compare that to wall of thorns, a 5th (!) level spell available to a first level character. There is no competition here. At all. (even in case greenbound wolf at 2 HD is interpreted to only create a 20ft thorn wall).

And again. This is only one out of many new powers a non-core level 1 druid has.

EDIT:

The ability to fly for one round. Even if entangle isn't an encounter ender, it still lasts for a whole minute.

If you cannot imagine a whole range of encounters/situations that at level 1 a druid able to swift action fly for one round (alongside tiny size), then you are not really trying imo.

another edit for eggynack:
I think the caster level set for greebound is "character level", and I am not quite sure what a character level for a +2 CR wolf is.
And sorry, I was wrong about the quadrupling for every level, since wall of thorn is only 1/day for the greenbound creature. You would get a doubling (or tripling/quintupling) with the higher level SNAs only.

[eggynack]

I'm not sure why you think an enemy won't be bound to one place. The plants explicitly hold the opponent fast, and have specific binding effects. They are anchored to an immobile object or tethered by an opposing force, pretty much no matter what. As for plants not filling the area, there's no real indication of that. The plants in the area wrap, twist, and entwine all creatures in the area, per the wording of the spell. There's not that much room for interpretation here.


I think the caster level set for greebound is "character level", and I am not quite sure what a character level for a +2 CR wolf is.
It's the same, as the HD is the same.

[Ivanhoe]

I'm not sure why you think an enemy won't be bound to one place. The plants explicitly hold the opponent fast, and have specific binding effects. They are anchored to an immobile object or tethered by an opposing force, pretty much no matter what. As for plants not filling the area, there's no real indication of that. The plants in the area wrap, twist, and entwine all creatures in the area, per the wording of the spell. There's not that much room for interpretation here.

With the dog plant, the plant is not really anchored somewhere. And the dog is entangled, too, so it is not an opposing force in that regard. It is a grey area for DM interpretation.
Similarly, I'd say that the spell description makes no mention of plants growing, so they can only entangle those in their square. Which in the case of the plant dog would even mean only the dog is entangled. It's a grey area imo, too, but if more here say that entangle should be interpreted your way, it's fine.
There is still plenty of my caveats remaining, anyhow.


It's the same, as the HD is the same.

OK, thanks!

Suggestion: provide a core level 1 druid with entangle and a riding dog. And then I'll show what a non-core level 1 druid can do, so you'll be able to see the power multiplication.

[eggynack]

With the dog plant, the plant is not really anchored somewhere. And the dog is entangled, too, so it is not an opposing force in that regard. It is a grey area for DM interpretation.
Similarly, I'd say that the spell description makes no mention of plants growing, so they can only entangle those in their square. Which in the case of the plant dog would even mean only the dog is entangled. It's a grey area imo, too, but if more here say that entangle should be interpreted your way, it's fine.
There is still plenty of my caveats remaining, anyhow.
It says that they wrap, twist, and entwine around creatures in the area. There is no stated limitation on plant size, so there isn't one. As for opposing forces and related things, tethering the opponent down is an expressly stated function of the spell, so that's what it does. It doesn't do a separate different thing if something different is the case, because there's no mechanism for that within the spell. Spells just do what they say they do. Anything else is pretty much fiat.


Suggestion: provide a core level 1 druid with entangle and a riding dog. And then I'll show what a non-core level 1 druid can do, so you'll be able to see the power multiplication.
I know the ways in which the one is better than the other, as well as the ways in which non-core level one druids can crush the game. You haven't even brought up some of the cool things you can do with a level one druid, like impeding stones, or omen of peril, or combining ashbound with greenbound summoning such that you get some actual duration. I mean, who needs winged watcher when you can be an anthropomorphic bat and just have an always on flight speed and a ridiculous wisdom bonus besides (as well as a constitution bonus if you go dragonborn)? It's a lot of stuff.

However, it's just not necessarily better than the stuff you get by moving out of core with a melee guy. A level one barbarian is moving from one attack to two, through nothing but the power of whirling frenzy, and he's getting it on a charge at that. He doesn't even need to spend feats on improved trip, because it's sitting right there in ACF form at level two. Intimidation becomes an actual thing out of core, acting as a high power AoE debuff that occurs at range, and if you're going to start tossing prestige classes into this, he gets both runescarred berserker and champion of gwynharwyf, which grant actually decent casting. The barbarian, when he moves out of core, actually gets to do stuff. Good stuff.

The druid is moving from breaking the game to breaking the game really really hard, and I know nearly every way that's possible, but that's not as much as just finding a spot on the map at all. In a world where the druid's animal companion is invalidating any tanking efforts of melee classes, and where their spells invalidate any other efforts, melee classes in core just don't have a niche. Non-core gives them one. I think it makes more sense if you think of it another way, setting non-core as default. If you give a druid and a barbarian access to everything under the sun, with every feat and ACF open for business, who's going to react better when you start setting restrictions? Which class is going to be able to adapt to the encroaching tide of book removal, and function in this new core world? I'd put my money on the druid every time.

[Ivanhoe]

On entangle: we agree to disagree, although I think your interpretation is the more common one.:smallwink:

On what a 1st level druid can do core and non-core. Yes, I was thinking along those lines that you suggested. All of what you mentioned already x-tuples the 1st level core druid (and there are more crazy things to add). And note: a 1st level core druid is not breaking the game at all. A non-core 1st level druid is. Hard, as you said.

Now compare that to the 1st level barbarian/non-core barbarian. The number of attack doubles. Really? Amazing, but hardly earth-shaking. Double the power (if you say damage is all a barbarian is about, but there are also other thing the barbarian can do even at 1st level).
Now...in what way is that going to even compare to the power rise of a non-core druid compared to the core version?

[eggynack]

Now compare that to the 1st level barbarian/non-core barbarian. The number of attack doubles. Really? Amazing, but hardly earth-shaking. Double the power (if you say damage is all a barbarian is about, but there are also other thing the barbarian can do even at 1st level).
Well, you're also getting it on a charge, due to pounce, and you get a total of a +2 to attack as a result. You also don't have to waste feats picking up improved trip, which is a pretty reasonable thing.


Now...in what way is that going to even compare to the power rise of a non-core druid compared to the core version?
Pretty well, because it grants the barbarian actual room to operate. They weren't really doing anything before, and were only marginally better than a riding dog in melee combat. This makes them a lot better, to the point where they're actually one of the best classes at the role. Also, the addition of casting later on isn't something to be discounted, as no casting to some casting is, again, better than some casting to more casting. Druids just don't lose that much of their ability to operate with game breaking power by staying in core, because a druid can adapt to any circumstance.

[Amphetryon]

On entangle: we agree to disagree, although I think your interpretation is the more common one.:smallwink:

On what a 1st level druid can do core and non-core. Yes, I was thinking along those lines that you suggested. All of what you mentioned already x-tuples the 1st level core druid (and there are more crazy things to add). And note: a 1st level core druid is not breaking the game at all. A non-core 1st level druid is. Hard, as you said.

Now compare that to the 1st level barbarian/non-core barbarian. The number of attack doubles. Really? Amazing, but hardly earth-shaking. Double the power (if you say damage is all a barbarian is about, but there are also other thing the barbarian can do even at 1st level).
Now...in what way is that going to even compare to the power rise of a non-core druid compared to the core version?

Again, the disagreement is over the amount of increased power/versatility that a core Melee gets when non-core materials are introduced, compared to the amount of increased power/versatility that a core Caster gets when non-core materials are introduced. If a core Melee isn't able to interact meaningfully with parts of the game (flying, non-combat encounters, miss chance, etc.), then adding things that increase the number of parts of the game with which he can interact is a more meaningful increase than allowing a core Caster, which can already interact with all of those parts of the game, to do so more efficiently.

[Ivanhoe]

Could there maybe be more concrete examples?
Say, show a barbarian level 1 build in core, and a level 1 build in non-core.
Then, illustrate the power/versatility increase.

Then do the same for the druid level 1.

For me, the answer so far is that the power/versatility rise for druid is much higher.
This is because ...
I look a non-core barbarian doubling his damage output (do not forget the -2 to attack penalty) moving from core to non-core. In core, the barbarian was the biggest damage dealer. In non-core, he gets outclassed by, say, the druid.
While adding no new specialty/role (like party face or scout).

I look at a core druid able to cast 2 entangles/day and have his 2 HD riding dog (with a plant on its back) either attack or be entangled.
Then I look at a non-core druid with +6 WIS, flying, getting 5th level spell effects, and a warbeast animal companion.
Apart from better fighting (and now leaving the barbarian in the dust in his niche), this druid offers more divination potential, better healing and scouting.

What am I missing?

But, as I said in the beginning, more concrete examples from your side would be welcome!

[eggynack]

I don't think that you can make a warbeast riding dog, as riding dogs already fall under the war trained category. Also, the non-core barbarian actually gets a +2 to attack in a whirling frenzy, because his +4 strength balances out the -2 attack penalty, and charging adds +2 to that. Meanwhile, the damage output comparison is pretty much the exact opposite. In core, the druid's best source of damage at level one is his riding dog, and the barbarian's best source of damage is hitting stuff in a rage. Out of core, the druid's best source of damage is his riding dog, and the barbarian's best source of damage is hitting stuff twice in a rage. It all seems rather tilted in favor of the barbarian gaining more in those terms.

Also, this discussion is inherently limited by the fact that it's stuck at level one. What is a 10th level barbarian doing at all? How can he even impact the game? A level one core barbarian at least has a vague niche provided by being a warm body, but what niche is a level ten core barbarian filling?

[Ivanhoe]

We should stick to the discussion for level 1 comparisons first, including builds from your side - and imo the level 10 comparison would show even more power increase for the druid (fleshrakers, greenbound/ashbound etc.).

The warbeast template iirc is widely acceptable to be applied to riding dogs, but you can also take a wolf instead.
Regarding the barbarian attack bonus, the core version has +2 from rage and +2 charge, for a total of +4. The non-core frenzy version has +2 from rage and +2 charge, -2 whirling frenzy, for a total of +2.
In total, core barbarian vs animal companion: barbarian has better combat performance.
In non-core, the warbeast animal companion, buffed with enrage animal is better. Heck, the druid could even get wild cohort for fun and then warbeast that as well.

[eggynack]

We should stick to the discussion for level 1 comparisons first, including builds from your side - and imo the level 10 comparison would show even more power increase for the druid (fleshrakers, greenbound/ashbound etc.).
I'm not even entirely sure what a first level barbarian is doing in core. Something like human for combat expertise+improved trip maybe, or orc with power attack? Having to divert intelligence is a hassle. Perhaps combat reflexes, as that's a decent feat at all levels. The druid in core is probably a human running augment summoning, which is pretty meaningless at this level. Putting a feat into improved initiative has a good chance of being the optimal feat here, but I would never do that on a build, so I wouldn't do that here.


In total, core barbarian vs animal companion: barbarian has better combat performance.
Not by all that much. We're talking less AC, marginally more HP, and somewhat higher hitting power. It's better, but the difference isn't all that meaningful. The barbarian is really just another riding dog.

In non-core, the warbeast animal companion, buffed with enrage animal is better. Heck, the druid could even get wild cohort for fun and then warbeast that as well.
In core, the riding dog, backed up with entangle, is likely better than an out of core riding dog backed up with enrage animal. I think you're really getting stuck on this spell that just isn't very good. The spell and action cost is too high to justify a bonus of that size. You can't even really get a warbeast at level one on a druid, as doing so would cost 100 GP, compared to your 50 GP of starting gold. You'd make some money during the actual game, but then you're sitting around for 14 months while adventures happen around you. It's a bigger downside than it's generally viewed as.

Edit: Forgot the spell list. You get three 0th's, which means something like detect magic*2, and cure minor*1, and two firsts which are probably both entangle. Out of core would honestly be pretty much the same for me, except one of the entangles would probably be an impeding stones instead, cause variety. You can add some variety to these spells later, when they're not your active slots, but at first level this is how you're dealing with problems. You don't have the room to toy around with cool utility stuff or spells that are generally low impact. One of the detect magics could also be a create water. Out of core, you probably don't have the money yet to pull off something like fire eyes+smoke stick variant.

Double edit: Realistically, my spell list would only start changing in a meaningful way starting at level three. I seriously hate core druid options for second level spells, and love non-core druid options for second level spells. You can also start relying on first level spells for utility stuff at this level, though probably not more than a single slot. I could imagine doing something like entangle, impeding stones, winged watcher, for example, to fit in with your taste in spells. There're a lot of options for that third slot at third level though. You could even vary your BFC a little, tossing wall of smoke onto the list. Instant of power is still too low impact at this point to justify a slot though.

Final edit: Basically, one of the few real changes between a first level core druid and non-core druid is greenbound summoning, and you rely on a particular interpretation of the term "attack" for that to even have a serious impact. In particular, if you check the PHB page 305, it says that, "The outcome of an attack is determined by an attack roll." Thus, wall of thorns is not an attack, and your summoning cannot ultimately make use of it. It's a ruling that fits the rules perfectly, especially if you view the invisibility definition of attack as only defining the term as it applies to invisibility.

[Ivanhoe]

eggynack, the human core barbarian, assuming elite array, has STR 19 raging, improved trip for +8 trip. The riding dog has +2 (+6 in opposed trip). The barbarian does have less AC, but a better attack bonus (even considering a possible +2 from flanking by the druid), more hp and does more damage by far (2d4+6 tripping halberd vs 1d6+2)
The core barbarian thus beats the core AC clearly.

In non-core, the druid can get the criminal apprentice feat (be linked to a forest bandit lord or some such) and have the money for warbeast.
The raging warbeast wolf meanwhile trips at modifyer +5 (+9 opposed), but overturns the barbarian in hp, in attack bonus and thus closes the gap for damage output (despite the barbarian's two attacks). Only the AC advantage of the animal companion is now lost (+2 dodge for barbarian, -2 to AC for raging wolf), but it gets a bonus feat as well from reaching 3 HD iirc.
Overall, it definitely is now at least equal to the non-core barbarian in combat.

Thus, steeper power rise for the druid (note that we are only looking at one of his class features here).

Edit on your edits:
With a +6 to WIS, the elite array druid has likely a 2nd first level bonus spell, so more versatility already at level 1. Also, what you said on 2nd level spells being better for non-core seems to support my argument.
Then, it is not only the wall of thorns that is so powerful. You summon for one round (ashbound: 2 rounds; you can get the feats with flaws non-core) a CR 3 creature that is practically unbeatable by the typical opponents a first level character faces. Also, it even has entangle at will and it boosts SNA that you as a druid can cast spontaneously, anyhow. How much more evidence of the massive power boost do you need?

[eggynack]

Some of your arguments seem mutually exclusive. You can't have a warbeast riding dog, have greenbound summoning, and have the +6 wisdom of anthropomorphic bat simultaneously unless you're running flaws. As for the core barbarian being better than the animal companion, that is true, but it is not by much. You're assuming rage, but you only get one rage a day with no source of extra rage. You also gave the dog only a 1d6+2 compared to the actual 1d6+3, which is relevant. Also also, if we're apparently assuming elite array here then the barbarian's stats would be something like 15 strength, 14 constitution, 13 intelligence, 12 dexterity, and that's just kinda awkward.

Meanwhile, for the non-core comparison, you've done the exact opposite. You're assuming a raging wolf for some reason, despite the fact that you can do that only twice a day at most. I would almost certainly never take a feat in order to apply the warbeast template, given that this is only helpful at first level, and druids don't need the burst of power. It's the same reason I wouldn't put improved initiative on a core druid. You end up with an animal companion that's basically a barbarian, compared to core where you have an animal companion that's basically a barbarian. A few points either way is meaningful, but it's just not meaningful enough.


So, basically, you move from the animal companion being a bit worse than the barbarian to being a little better, and that's in a best case scenario. That's not really enough to make the druid's gains better than the barbarian's, given how much the barbarian was already outclassed by spells. Meanwhile, you still haven't proved that greenbound even lets you access these spells at first level, which is a thing I've provided a solid counterargument for. So, the druid's animal companion moves from a crazy spellcaster with a roughly barbarian equal melee guy to a marginally crazier spellcaster with a roughly barbarian equal melee guy. The barbarian moves from a character who's incompetent at pretty much everything to one of the better pure beatsticks in the game. It's a thing that becomes more apparent at level two, where the barbarian immediately gets improved trip, and doubly apparent later on, when the barbarian doesn't get completely invalidated by everything.

[Killer Angel]

If a core Melee isn't able to interact meaningfully with parts of the game (flying, non-combat encounters, miss chance, etc.), then adding things that increase the number of parts of the game with which he can interact is a more meaningful increase than allowing a core Caster, which can already interact with all of those parts of the game, to do so more efficiently.

That's true, but one of the point is that this increased efficiency, means that they can do more things than before, earlier than before, and quicker than before. Especially in combat, it's a solid improvement.

[eggynack]

That's true, but one of the point is that this increased efficiency, means that they can do more things than before, earlier than before, and quicker than before. Especially in combat, it's a solid improvement.
It's a huge improvement. It's just a smaller improvement than being able to do these things at all in the first place.

[Amphetryon]

That's true, but one of the point is that this increased efficiency, means that they can do more things than before, earlier than before, and quicker than before. Especially in combat, it's a solid improvement.

Is it a more 'solid improvement' than that made by a non-caster Core Class, like Barbarian or Fighter, when non-Core options open up for both? Is it an improvement of equal proportion? Or, is the Barbarian or Fighter improving more than a Druid or other core Caster, relative to starting position, when non-Core materials become available?

See, I've never said that it wasn't an improvement, and I haven't seen anyone else in this thread argue that it wasn't an improvement, although your response reads as a refutation of that position. What appears to be the crux of the debate is whether the Barbarian or Fighter's ability to suddenly interact meaningfully with parts of the game that were off-limits before (assuming a friendly caster didn't help out) is more, or less, of a 'solid improvement' than the Druid's (or other Core caster)'s ability to break the game in ways OTHER than those that were already available in Core, once non-Core options become available.

[Killer Angel]

See, I've never said that it wasn't an improvement, and I haven't seen anyone else in this thread argue that it wasn't an improvement, although your response reads as a refutation of that position.

I didn't wanted to imply that, sorry, I wanted only to underline the importance of the improvements for casters, outside cores.


What appears to be the crux of the debate is whether the Barbarian or Fighter's ability to suddenly interact meaningfully with parts of the game that were off-limits before (assuming a friendly caster didn't help out) is more, or less, of a 'solid improvement' than the Druid's (or other Core caster)'s ability to break the game in ways OTHER than those that were already available in Core, once non-Core options become available.

i'll answer to this in three steps.

If we're talking specifically about druid, outside core, you are a shapechanged caster with all your magic items, This increases hugely your variety.

As I've said before in this thread, when your fighter goes to "i fight with a sword" to "Now I have a gun!", and the caster goes to "I have a sopwhit camel" to "I have a B-2 Spirit Stealth", the improvement for the fighter is more significative and you can more easily appreciate the superior quality of the available options, but the gap in power between the two classes isn't diminished at all...

Another thing I've said before (but that sadly received no answer, and I would like to hear your opinions...), is that IMO, the huge improvements for meleers, outside core, usually are not represented by additional abilities / feats / similar things, but by the new classes: outside core, you have little reasons to use the core non-caster classes, because there are better replacements, despite the boosts given to core meleers by splatbooks (the real improvement for the paladinesque concept, it's not a paladin with Battle Blessing. It's the Crusader)

[eggynack]

Another thing I've said before (but that sadly received no answer... :smallfrown:), is that IMO, the huge improvements for meleers, outside core, usually are not represented by additional abilities / feats / similar things, but by the new classes: outside core, you have little reasons to use the core non-caster classes, because there are better replacements, despite the boosts given to core meleers by splatbooks (the real improvement for the paladinesque concept, it's not a paladin with Battle Blessing. It's the Crusader)
I think it's both things to varying degrees. A non-core fighter is tier four, which is higher than tier five, and a warblade is tier three, which is also higher than tier five. Paladins can become crusaders, or they can also become weird pseudo-wizards running SotAO and harmonious knight. Monks can be unarmed swordsages, but they can also be tashalatora, or they can just have a bunch of ACF's. The new classes represent an improvement, perhaps even a bigger one, but the new non-class things also represent an improvement. Perhaps either one is enough, but I think that both, relative to casters, are accurate.

[Killer Angel]

I think it's both things to varying degrees. A non-core fighter is tier four, which is higher than tier five, and a warblade is tier three, which is also higher than tier five. Paladins can become crusaders, or they can also become weird pseudo-wizards running SotAO and harmonious knight. Monks can be unarmed swordsages, but they can also be tashalatora, or they can just have a bunch of ACF's. The new classes represent an improvement, perhaps even a bigger one, but the new non-class things also represent an improvement. Perhaps either one is enough, but I think that both, relative to casters, are accurate.

It makes sense.

In the end, I continue to believe that with splatbooks, the increase of sheer power (plus a sprinkle of increased versatility) is higher for the casters...
BUT, I can see that the large increase of versatility (plus some amount of power) for low tier classes, is a more significative improvement for their overall quality.

[Story]

I'd argue that free Persist Spells opens up a whole new world of possibilities for casters, but for the most part, power increases are marginal.

[eggynack]

I'd argue that free Persist Spells opens up a whole new world of possibilities for casters, but for the most part, power increases are marginal.
Indeed, at least apart from druids who do not do that as a rule. It's just both hard to pull off and low in payoff. Fortunately, druids do other things, like dragon wild shape.

[LordBlades]

It's entirely likely I'm remembering this less than perfectly, but I think I've seen arguments that Venomfire alone can make a Druid a more than competent archer (with all the standard caveats about resistances and immunities).

I'm afb atm so all this is from memory, but I think Venomfire only applies to natural attacks that are poisonius, and I can't think of any creature that meets those requirements on a ranged attack atm.

I've never seen any claims about druids being really good at archery outside corner cases (like Pickford's Scrodinger's fighter threads). Now clerics is a different matter altogether.

[TuggyNE]

I'm afb atm so all this is from memory, but I think Venomfire only applies to natural attacks that are poisonius, and I can't think of any creature that meets those requirements on a ranged attack atm.

That's true, but there's guardian nagas in Core, though you'd need a non-Core feat to take their shape. On the bright side, 1d10 Con + Xd6 acid at will on a ranged touch? Do want!

Outside of Core I don't know, but there's probably another 2-10 monsters of miscellaneous sorts.

[Ivanhoe]

On the question that Killer Angel brought up:
It is quite telling that in non-core, the designers basically abandoned (except mainly some nice ACFs) the original core mundane classes and added new ones that had more powers or a completely different game mechanism.
The ToB classes are a big example of this, and they are clearly a higher tier than the core mundanes.
Still, the OP question here is about core tiers - or what is the change to tiers when including all material and then just looking at core. For the ToB warblade, for instance, this cannot be answered at all since it is not available in core.

So for this purpose, we have to look at what rogue, barbarian, fighter and monk gain outside core. And that is fairly limited compared to what ToB classes have and what the core casters receive.


Some of your arguments seem mutually exclusive. You can't have a warbeast riding dog, have greenbound summoning, and have the +6 wisdom of anthropomorphic bat simultaneously unless you're running flaws.

That is not mutually exclusive. Flaws are non-core, and I have mentioned that a druid level 1 build having 3 feats will need flaws.


As for the core barbarian being better than the animal companion, that is true, but it is not by much. You're assuming rage, but you only get one rage a day with no source of extra rage.

Even without rage the barbarian is clearly ahead, with higher trip, same attack bonus (much higher when trip is successful with higher chance than dog), higher damage, more reach, ability to use ranged weapons, and now also likely higher AC (boosted as well by successful trip with higher chance than dog).


You also gave the dog only a 1d6+2 compared to the actual 1d6+3, which is relevant. Also also, if we're apparently assuming elite array here then the barbarian's stats would be something like 15 strength, 14 constitution, 13 intelligence, 12 dexterity, and that's just kinda awkward.

Elite array is not awkward, but fairly common and even to the barbarian's disadvantage (the higher PB, the further ahead of the dog the barbarian pulls). And yes, I overlooked the higher base damage of the dog. 1 damage! You have to admit that this is not changing the answer to the question at all who does more damage when the dog does 1d6+3 or +2, while the barbarian is doing 2d4+6 (or 2d4+3 non-raging)

So we can conclude that the barbarian is clearly better than the AC in core in his niche, namely combat.


Meanwhile, for the non-core comparison, you've done the exact opposite. You're assuming a raging wolf for some reason, despite the fact that you can do that only twice a day at most.

Three times actually, given the new WIS score of 20+. That should be enough (also given the versatility that the druid gets to spontaneously use greenbound SNA).


I would almost certainly never take a feat in order to apply the warbeast template, given that this is only helpful at first level, and druids don't need the burst of power. It's the same reason I wouldn't put improved initiative on a core druid.

Well, there are always ways non-core to change low-level feats again at higher levels. And frankly, I do not feel that the druid is feat-starved, even when using one of his three first level feats for criminal background (also granting some nice class skills). Just take the most broken ones like greenbound summoning and some that let you wildshape into non-animal forms.


You end up with an animal companion that's basically a barbarian, compared to core where you have an animal companion that's basically a barbarian. A few points either way is meaningful, but it's just not meaningful enough.

No, as shown repeatedly, the non-core AC is now clearly more powerful than the non-core barbarian. It even now gets rage, the distinctive class ability of the barbarian. Going non-core is just humiliating for mundanes when they see what casters get.
In core, the babarian at least was clearly stronger in his niche and only the bard had some lacklustre semi-rage spell, now he's completely redundant. Already at level 1.
And it gets worse from there with fleshraker dinosaurs, natural bond, venomfire, nature's avatar etc. All non-core. All making the main core pc damage dealer redundant.


So, basically, you move from the animal companion being a bit worse than the barbarian to being a little better, and that's in a best case scenario. That's not really enough to make the druid's gains better than the barbarian's, given how much the barbarian was already outclassed by spells.

Not enough? Well, it is only one class ability of the druid that already makes the barbarian redundant. We have not even looked at the stellar power gain the other druid class abilities get non-core...


Meanwhile, you still haven't proved that greenbound even lets you access these spells at first level, which is a thing I've provided a solid counterargument for.

It has already been discussed at length. A greenbound summoned wolf present for 1 round and attacking to the best of its ability will use the wall of thorns, since that is its best ability. It truly most often ends encounters at level 1, not the more situational entangle (even with the innovative dog plant :smallcool:). That its caster level will only allow a much smaller wall of thorns area is not really important. And even without using wall of thorns, it is a CR 3 creature with 10/magic and slashing damage reduction.
Combine with ashbound summoning, and it will be around for the two rounds that can end the encounter, too.
And even while it would be DM fiat to assume that the greenbound wolf would cast entangle in its one round, it highlights that the greenbound SNA non-core greatly outperforms the (apparently) best druid spell in core.
And with every higher level, the greenbound creature stays longer.


So, the druid's animal companion moves from a crazy spellcaster with a roughly barbarian equal melee guy to a marginally crazier spellcaster with a roughly barbarian equal melee guy. The barbarian moves from a character who's incompetent at pretty much everything to one of the better pure beatsticks in the game. It's a thing that becomes more apparent at level two, where the barbarian immediately gets improved trip, and doubly apparent later on, when the barbarian doesn't get completely invalidated by everything.

Question: how again does the barbarian get improved trip at level 2? I forgot about that alternate class feature. Anyhow, in our example he already has taken it at level 1 in non-core. If not, he would at level 1 even be further behind the AC.

What I get from your comments is that you, too, now say that the non-core druid gets an AC now better than the barbarian (when in core it was the other way round). The difference may be only marginal (say power boost for AC +120% and for barbarian just 100%; I'd argue the AC gains more even, but anyway). However, it is a major event for tier categories, since one class ability of the druid alone now is better than the whole barbarian niche of combat/damage dealing.
So we are getting closer in our opinions, I think.

Now, look again at that "marginally crazier" spellcaster also at levels beyond level 1.
You could, for instance, do duel tests of the barbarian vs the animal companion at all levels. Non-core and core. I predict that non-core would be clear wins vor the AC, but core clear losses (possibly due to better wbl use of the barbarian non-core at higher levels the AC may lose again, but equipment is not what tiers are about).
Then, what you say is "marginally crazier", means for a non-core druid:
planar shepherd. Plus various means of access to dragon, magical beast, aberration and outsider forms, the latter even with all ex/su/sp abilities eventually by level 14. 14!
And individual spells that can be looked at in druid handbooks that often get marked as "outright broken".

The worst thus is that while shapechange, for instance, is already ultra-powerful at level 17, the druid now gets an even better ability (level 14 planar shepherd outsider form) three levels earlier, plus the ability to look at a multiplied selection of monsters to choose abilities from.

This is not marginally crazy, that is utterly crazy and broken.

You mentioned looking at level 10 druid and compare core to non-core. What do you see at that level that will not mean a complete multiplication of power with non-core material, whereas the barbarian remains a worse beatstick than the AC?

Again, to sum up in tier terms:
Core, barbarian has the combat/damage niche. Druid has somewhat less powerful combat (AC) and is versatile with spells (some healing) and has diplomacy (party face).
Non-core, barbarian gets redundant in damage niche. Druid now has ultra-powerful AC, while on top also getting the niche of scouting, better healing, better divinations, and diplomacy/social interaction spells/skill boosts.

Thus, the tier of a non-core druid must be higher than in core (whether that is from 1 to 0 or 2 to one depends on the scale used), while barbarian either stagnates or drifts lower.

[(Un)Inspired]

Honestly, I think the best way to keep it simple, while also maintaining balance and a sense of fun, is to ban everything except XPH and TOB. Pull from Core only what you need to play, with none of the classes or spells, only some of the feats, and the items. ToB is straightfoward except for multiclassing, XPH a little more complicated but much simpler than the mess of spell levels, spell slots, spells known, and spells prepared that most casters have (and with nice and condensed rules, no need for PHB2, HoH, CArc, and PHB like is needed for the three easy Vancian casters).

Dude, seriously run this! I'll play a Wilder, it will be glorious.

[LordBlades]

Given that in a non-core environment you ca get something like Dragonborn Water Orc Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian with Whirling frenzy, how on earth is that worse than a level 1 animal companion? For bonus points, grab Hidden Talent for Expansion with a flaw and now you can be Large and have reach for a bit too.


Doubly so when the 'widely accepted'warbeast template sparks fierce debate everytime it's brought up.

The difference between core and non-core barbarian is that non-core barbarian can reliably one-shot stuff, thus remaining marginally relevant in front of spells (it really doesn't matter whether you took 1% or 99% of a monster's HP if he's not deadvand casters still need to use some BFC on him)

[Ivanhoe]

Given that in a non-core environment you ca get something like Dragonborn Water Orc Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian with Whirling frenzy, how on earth is that worse than a level 1 animal companion? For bonus points, grab Hidden Talent for Expansion with a flaw and now you can be Large and have reach for a bit too.

Well, expansion could get the barbarian into MAD territory since you need to devote 13 CHR to manifest (-2 to CHR for orc), and even then it only lasts 1 round. I'd say that is not enough to equal 3 HD wolf with rage 3/day without fatigue.
However, your idea got me thinking ... maybe the barbarian could rather take jotunbrud (although I am not sure whether that would be possible with the spirit lion totem barbarian - they are both regional feats, I think). If that works probably non-core barabarian and AC would be on even terms. But still a bigger power increase for the AC, and imo it gets worse from there.


Doubly so when the 'widely accepted'warbeast template sparks fierce debate everytime it's brought up.

I think the debate focuses more on whether it is possible to add onto a riding dog. But with a wolf it should be fine.
And the debate is of course also that warbeast for AC is horribly broken at level 1. Most DMs, including me, would not allow it - although they would rarely ban a core AC. Which is my point.


The difference between core and non-core barbarian is that non-core barbarian can reliably one-shot stuff, thus remaining marginally relevant in front of spells (it really doesn't matter whether you took 1% or 99% of a monster's HP if he's not deadvand casters still need to use some BFC on him)

A core barbarian, say human with improved trip, can also reliably one-shot stuff that comes up at level 1 (up to CR 1), I'd say. Of course the non-core barbarian can do it better, but that is not a big help when he gets equaled or outshined by the druid player's animal companion.

[Amphetryon]

A core barbarian, say human with improved trip, can also reliably one-shot stuff that comes up at level 1 (up to CR 1), I'd say. Of course the non-core barbarian can do it better, but that is not a big help when he gets equaled or outshined by the druid player's animal companion.

Your apparent example Core Barbarian - assuming you haven't shifted from Level 1 - is already MAD, needing STR, CON, DEX, and INT all at 13 or above, before considering the general necessity for WIS.

[Killer Angel]

On the question that Killer Angel brought up:
It is quite telling that in non-core, the designers basically abandoned (except mainly some nice ACFs) the original core mundane classes and added new ones that had more powers or a completely different game mechanism.
The ToB classes are a big example of this, and they are clearly a higher tier than the core mundanes.


To be fair, the introduction of different game mechanics, brought also "replacements" for the casters (psionic, for example).

But of course, without tier improvements.

[eggynack]

That is not mutually exclusive. Flaws are non-core, and I have mentioned that a druid level 1 build having 3 feats will need flaws.
I don't think this is a thing you can just assume as available, given that flaws tend to be more discretionary in their use than some things.



Even without rage the barbarian is clearly ahead, with higher trip, same attack bonus (much higher when trip is successful with higher chance than dog), higher damage, more reach, ability to use ranged weapons, and now also likely higher AC (boosted as well by successful trip with higher chance than dog).

Elite array is not awkward, but fairly common and even to the barbarian's disadvantage (the higher PB, the further ahead of the dog the barbarian pulls). And yes, I overlooked the higher base damage of the dog. 1 damage! You have to admit that this is not changing the answer to the question at all who does more damage when the dog does 1d6+3 or +2, while the barbarian is doing 2d4+6 (or 2d4+3 non-raging)

So we can conclude that the barbarian is clearly better than the AC in core in his niche, namely combat.
Yes, the barbarian is almost certainly better at combat in core. It's just not to a degree that's relevant when compared to the fact that the druid also gets a reasonably wide variety of spells.


Three times actually, given the new WIS score of 20+. That should be enough (also given the versatility that the druid gets to spontaneously use greenbound SNA).
Seriously? Your argument sounds like one for druids getting worse in a non-core environment, given that you're trading out every instance of a high power spell like entangle for a pile of crap. Even if you're still assuming perfect greenbound use, you could be doing actual things with these slots.



Well, there are always ways non-core to change low-level feats again at higher levels. And frankly, I do not feel that the druid is feat-starved, even when using one of his three first level feats for criminal background (also granting some nice class skills). Just take the most broken ones like greenbound summoning and some that let you wildshape into non-animal forms.
Really? I've always felt that they are a lot feat starved. Druids have access to a ridiculous variety of high power feats, between casting feats, summoning feats, wild shape feats, and animal companion feats. There is always something crazy you could be doing.


It has already been discussed at length.
Not this, and not really. My argument is that this doesn't even qualify as an attack, even if it does qualify as a, "to the best of their ability." I provided a perfectly reasonable attack definition that does not include wall of thorns.


Question: how again does the barbarian get improved trip at level 2? I forgot about that alternate class feature. Anyhow, in our example he already has taken it at level 1 in non-core. If not, he would at level 1 even be further behind the AC.
wolf totem (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#wolfTotemClassFeatures ).


What I get from your comments is that you, too, now say that the non-core druid gets an AC now better than the barbarian (when in core it was the other way round). The difference may be only marginal (say power boost for AC +120% and for barbarian just 100%; I'd argue the AC gains more even, but anyway). However, it is a major event for tier categories, since one class ability of the druid alone now is better than the whole barbarian niche of combat/damage dealing.
It's possible, though not definite, and it's something the druid was pretty much doing already to core melee classes, at least non-barbarian ones. The fact is though that it's irrelevant. This druid shift, from a caster with a marginally worse barbarian, to a caster with a marginally better barbarian, is smaller than this barbarian shift, from an incompetent melee guy to a rather competent one.


And individual spells that can be looked at in druid handbooks that often get marked as "outright broken".
That was true in core also.


You mentioned looking at level 10 druid and compare core to non-core. What do you see at that level that will not mean a complete multiplication of power with non-core material, whereas the barbarian remains a worse beatstick than the AC?
Runescarred berserker, generally. Also, maybe intimidation shenanigans, and also probably shock trooper.

[Ivanhoe]

I don't think this is a thing you can just assume as available, given that flaws tend to be more discretionary in their use than some things.

Well, I'd consider the tier list as encompassing all official material. If UA is usually excluded, it should be mentioned somewhere (but note that you also took the UA barbarian ACFs).


Yes, the barbarian is almost certainly better at combat in core. It's just not to a degree that's relevant when compared to the fact that the druid also gets a reasonably wide variety of spells.

Having combat/damage output as your niche is important for tiers, and the spells the druid gets in core, in particular at low levels, is not really filling all other niches. That is done in non-core.
Overall the core druid is weaker than the core barbarian in the combat/damage niche.


Seriously? Your argument sounds like one for druids getting worse in a non-core environment, given that you're trading out every instance of a high power spell like entangle for a pile of crap. Even if you're still assuming perfect greenbound use, you could be doing actual things with these slots.

Versatility. The non-core druid can, if he likes to, make the barbarian obsolete on combat-heavy days with his buffed AC. Or, on the next day, predict imminent danger for the group. Or, on the next day, use entangle. And always summon greenbound SNA.
Note also that entangle is not always better than enrage animal.


Really? I've always felt that they are a lot feat starved. Druids have access to a ridiculous variety of high power feats, between casting feats, summoning feats, wild shape feats, and animal companion feats. There is always something crazy you could be doing.

Truth to tell, only through this discussion I get to realise there are so many more broken non-core feats beyond natural spell.:smallsmile:


Not this, and not really. My argument is that this doesn't even qualify as an attack, even if it does qualify as a, "to the best of their ability." I provided a perfectly reasonable attack definition that does not include wall of thorns.

I see it now - sorry that I did not get it earlier. Yes, your interpretation is correct. "Attack" is detailed in the combat section and it does not include spellcasting (and in the invisibility spell the exception to this rule is made clear). So, the non-core druid will have to wait for level 5 with speak with plants to get access to all the greenbound special effects.
Still, a greenbound SNA with DR is powerful enought to easily overcome CR 1 opponents.


wolf totem (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#wolfTotemClassFeatures ).

Thanks a lot! I overlooked that.


It's possible, though not definite, and it's something the druid was pretty much doing already to core melee classes, at least non-barbarian ones. The fact is though that it's irrelevant. This druid shift, from a caster with a marginally worse barbarian, to a caster with a marginally better barbarian, is smaller than this barbarian shift, from an incompetent melee guy to a rather competent one.

Here, at least for level 1, we seem to continue to disagree.
I see this power shift as decisive in terms of (relative) tier consequence for the barbarian. Also, the druid gets much more out of his casting, the higher he rises, filling basically all adventurer roles superbly while the barbarian remains (slightly?) behind the animal companion of the druid.
Thus, widening tier gap in non-core.


That was true in core also.

Excepting shapechange, there is no real broken core spell for druids. Non-core has several of those.


Runescarred berserker, generally. Also, maybe intimidation shenanigans, and also probably shock trooper.

The runescarred beserker prestige class by level 10 is not really providing big things (compared to a level 10 core barbarian), while facing a hefty feat tax. The PrC essentially gives the barbarian into a much weaker spellcasting than even the core paladin or ranger, plus gets quite mad with WIS. Invisibility/see invisibility are nice, though.
Do you really think that this is a bigger power boost to the barbarian than what a non-core druid gets compared to a core druid at level 10?

[Karnith]

Runescarred berserker, generally. Also, maybe intimidation shenanigans, and also probably shock trooper.
Champion of Gwynharwyf, too. Bear Warrior and Frenzied Berserker (provided you have some way of dealing with the Frenzies) are also some pretty good additions to a Barbarian build if you're just looking for numbers.

[Amphetryon]

Champion of Gwynharwyf, too. Bear Warrior and Frenzied Berserker (provided you have some way of dealing with the Frenzies) are also some pretty good additions to a Barbarian build.

All of which have the advantage over Runescarred Berzerker of not needing special dispensation from the DM to qualify for in 3.5.

[eggynack]

Well, I'd consider the tier list as encompassing all official material. If UA is usually excluded, it should be mentioned somewhere (but note that you also took the UA barbarian ACFs).
I generally see those used with more alacrity than flaws. Might be mistaken though. Some consideration may need to be given about what the barbarian could do with these flaws, because it might be pretty good.


Overall the core druid is weaker than the core barbarian in the combat/damage niche.
Not by much, especially when you consider the fact that the druid can add to the damage by shooting sling bullets/produce flame. He's also stronger in pretty much every other niche. Thus, to use arbitrary numbers, the druid in core is a one in everything, but a three in direct damage, and now he's a one in direct damage. The barbarian is a five in everything, but a three in direct damage, and now he's a one in direct damage. It means more for the barbarian that this is happening.


Note also that entangle is not always better than enrage animal.
Not always. Just usually. A core druid preparing two entangles is probably better than a non-core druid preparing three enrage animals. Because druids are better than barbarians.


Truth to tell, only through this discussion I get to realise there are so many more broken non-core feats beyond natural spell.:smallsmile:
Nifty. It's always a good thing to increase the total quantity of druid knowledge in existence. Also, I got to add my new entangle strategy and winged watcher to my handbook. I tend to undervalue druid flight options a bit, cause druids have native access to the best flight in the game through wild shape.


Still, a greenbound SNA with DR is powerful enough to easily overcome CR 1 opponents.
Almost certainly in time, but you don't have much of it.



Thanks a lot! I overlooked that.

It's pretty great. Ditching the intelligence prerequisite on improved trip is rather important from a build perspective.


Thus, widening tier gap in non-core.
Ultimately, if we're going purely tier based, there is likely no shift at all here. Barbarians are tier four in core, and also tier four in non-core. I think the issue is that barbarians are already rather competent melee competitors with low book access. It's harder to say the same for tier five classes, like monks, fighters, and paladins. The only real tier shift comes about with prestige class use, which does shrink the gap.


Excepting shapechange, there is no real broken core spell for druids. Non-core has several of those.
There are quite a few, actually. There's entangle, sleet storm, stone shape, wind wall (especially on druids, for whom situational spells are made less situational), dispel magic, freedom of movement, baleful polymorph, control winds, wall of thorns, antilife shell, find the path, greater dispel magic (especially on druids, for whom normal dispel magic is overleveled), spellstaff, transport via plants (just for being crappy teleport, and nothing more), and there's really not much for 7th's and 8th's.

Not all of these spells would show up on the list of a non-core druid, but many of them actually would, because you often actually don't get better options. For example, people sometimes toss out haboob or arctic haze as superior sleet storm alternatives, but they are generally inferior spells. Similarly, blizzard and call avalanche are great, but there will always be room for control winds and its massive tornadoes.


The runescarred beserker prestige class by level 10 is not really providing big things (compared to a level 10 core barbarian), while facing a hefty feat tax. The PrC essentially gives the barbarian into a much weaker spellcasting than even the core paladin or ranger, plus gets quite mad with WIS. Invisibility/see invisibility are nice, though.
It's all about the list, and the runescarred berserker list is significantly more powerful than the ranger or paladin list. The two spells you mentioned are very important, allowing you access to niches you just didn't have before, and you also get stuff like protection from X and bull's strength. Things probably hit a much higher point at level 12 though, where you get air walk, death ward, freedom of movement, greater magic weapon, and haste.


Do you really think that this is a bigger power boost to the barbarian than what a non-core druid gets compared to a core druid at level 10?
Yeah. Spells to better spells is less than no spells to spells. Especially when one of those spells is AMF.

[Ivanhoe]

Thus, to use arbitrary numbers, the druid in core is a one in everything, but a three in direct damage, and now he's a one in direct damage. The barbarian is a five in everything, but a three in direct damage, and now he's a one in direct damage. It means more for the barbarian that this is happening.

That is quite a good way to put it.
However, I'd still doubt that over levels 1-20, barbarians are "one" or tier 1 in direct damage in non-core, or that the druid equals them in core in that regard. Non-core barbarians may occasionally remain equal to or better than the AC, but being downgraded in realtive terms to compare vs only one druid class feature already is telling something.
And the main problem (also for other mundanes) is simply that while they get stronger in their niche, may receive minor boosts to other niches, the casters now get better than the mundanes in all niches, at all levels.

That is what I deplore.:smallfrown:




Ultimately, if we're going purely tier based, there is likely no shift at all here. Barbarians are tier four in core, and also tier four in non-core. I think the issue is that barbarians are already rather competent melee competitors with low book access. It's harder to say the same for tier five classes, like monks, fighters, and paladins. The only real tier shift comes about with prestige class use, which does shrink the gap.

This is where I get confused. I also say that the barbarians' tier remain unchanged core to non-core. But the druid receives such a boost, it should somehow be reflected. Thus I guess the druid is not really tier 1 in core, but rather a 2.

There is always a reason with just the core rules to play a fighter or rogue or barbarian at least at the low levels. In non-core, there no longer is from a tier perspective (only fluff perspective remaining).
Hence, I feel a core tier list should somehow capture this major difference.


There are quite a few, actually. There's entangle, sleet storm, stone shape, wind wall (especially on druids, for whom situational spells are made less situational), dispel magic, freedom of movement, baleful polymorph, control winds, wall of thorns, antilife shell, find the path, greater dispel magic (especially on druids, for whom normal dispel magic is overleveled), spellstaff, transport via plants (just for being crappy teleport, and nothing more), and there's really not much for 7th's and 8th's.

No, while all of these spells are quite to very good, they are not broken. The core druid's spell list is considered the weakest of the full casters for a reason. Even mundanes have methods in core to still shine when a druid casts these spells, since either they never really end encounters or they are only supporting the mundane with area control.
Key spell effects like Invisibility, teleport, access to planes are all only available at much higher levels than in non-core.

Also, at this point a question: why do you think control winds is so amazing? Most of the times, the druid will have no wind at all around him. To create a tornado from this common situation (say, in a dungeon), he will have to be 21st level (7 steps from calm winds to tornado).


It's all about the list, and the runescarred berserker list is significantly more powerful than the ranger or paladin list. The two spells you mentioned are very important, allowing you access to niches you just didn't have before, and you also get stuff like protection from X and bull's strength. Things probably hit a much higher point at level 12 though, where you get air walk, death ward, freedom of movement, greater magic weapon, and haste.

(...) Especially when one of those spells is AMF.

Now I must say I am impressed - I did not look at levels 3-5 of runescarred spells and this looks like a wish list of what mundanes miss in core as class skills. If only it were not so late (druid broke the game several times until non-core until barbarian runescarred beserker gets AMF), and needing WIS 15 hurts a bit.
But definitely, from level 12, i think the barbarian would non-core then be better than the AC.:smallsmile:

[eggynack]

Thus I guess the druid is not really tier 1 in core, but rather a 2.
That's the problem, I think, because I don't think you're right about that.


Also, at this point a question: why do you think control winds is so amazing? Most of the times, the druid will have no wind at all around him. To create a tornado from this common situation (say, in a dungeon), he will have to be 21st level (7 steps from calm winds to tornado).
How did you get to seven steps? There are only five steps listed in the spell. By all appearances, it looks like you jump right from whatever form of calm you had before to windstorm levels. Also, even if you ignore the wording of control winds and use the environmental effects listing, it would still take a maximum of six steps to get to tornado. That's accessible as early as level 13 with nothing but core CL boosters (karma beads and an orange ioun stone in particular).

[Ivanhoe]

That's the problem, I think, because I don't think you're right about that.

Possibly - so no conclusion reached here (at least for druid vs barbarian ...:smallwink: ).


How did you get to seven steps? There are only five steps listed in the spell. By all appearances, it looks like you jump right from whatever form of calm you had before to windstorm levels. Also, even if you ignore the wording of control winds and use the environmental effects listing, it would still take a maximum of six steps to get to tornado. That's accessible as early as level 13 with nothing but core CL boosters (karma beads and an orange ioun stone in particular).

The control winds spell makes no mention of what steps to use, it only summarises the stronger states of wind conditions (if only the spell descriptions were used it would be bad, since no game effects are given with the spell categories). You are right about the environmental effects - there are six steps (I misread "light" as meaning not calm, but the category starts at 0 wind speed...). So, level 18 for most situations, as likely appropriate, barring caster level boosters. Yep, it is strong, but I do not know whether it is really broken. Depends on how windy the campaign is and what kind of aces the druid's opponents have up their sleeves:smallsmile:

[Story]

I've never seen any claims about druids being really good at archery outside corner cases (like Pickford's Scrodinger's fighter threads). Now clerics is a different matter altogether.

I seem to recall Tippy posting a build in that thread which used a 3 level dip to get WIS to ranged attacks twice and ranged damage twice. Admittedly, it's not directly making use of Druid abilities, but Druids can afford to be WIS Sad (even more than Clerics since the Anthropomorphic Bat's low movespeed hurts without wildshape) and also get the craziness that is Owl's Insight. A Druid can quite plausibly get 50+ Wis by level 20.

[eggynack]

The control winds spell makes no mention of what steps to use, it only summarises the stronger states of wind conditions (if only the spell descriptions were used it would be bad, since no game effects are given with the spell categories). You are right about the environmental effects - there are six steps (I misread "light" as meaning not calm, but the category starts at 0 wind speed...). So, level 18 for most situations, as likely appropriate, barring caster level boosters. Yep, it is strong, but I do not know whether it is really broken. Depends on how windy the campaign is and what kind of aces the druid's opponents have up their sleeves:smallsmile:
Control winds says that it describes the categories of wind strength, which means that these are the categories of wind strength. It says that there's more detail about those conditions in the DMG, but that doesn't make these stop being the conditions. As for the actual impact, in combat control winds has the capacity to control an entire battlefield at once, simultaneously stopping your enemy's progress, particularly if they're flying, and completely cutting off ranged attacks. It's like if wind wall cut off any other means of approach. It gets even crazier with tornado speed, because the impact of that is basically a wide area save or lose, trapping enemies for about 5.5 rounds and possibly killing them in the process, and it might not even have a save depending on whether you think contact is enough. It's even SR: no because awesomeness.

Control winds is also insane in an out of combat context. If you're running a caster level of 15, which you have to for tornadoes anyway, the tornado exists in a 600 foot area for two and a half hours. Winds at those speeds have the capacity to destroy pretty much anything in its area, from buildings to trees, leaving only a tiny party shaped hole in its devastation. It's one of the first mass destruction spells, and a pretty effective one at that, even if I would rely on blizzard for the purpose out of core.

[Endarire]

Ivanhoe: When thinking about ways to deal damage at a greater-than-1 die per CL rate, I first thought scorching ray. Power word pain never came to mind to put on a wand.

I used alter self to become an Avariel (a non-core flying form) because of the 10 min/CL duration, though at only 50' (average maneuverability). I could have also cast fly to fly at 60' (good maneuverability) for 1 min/CL. I preferred the longer duration.

Swift invisibility is not on the Wizard spell list.

As for playing with other non-core sources, I want to. I have over 70 D&D 3.x books and want to use them. I chose the abilities most fitting to my character, core or not, and made a character I wanted to make and play. Arbitrarily drawing the line without considering what I'm excluding or including seems awkward.

[Ivanhoe]

Ivanhoe: When thinking about ways to deal damage at a greater-than-1 die per CL rate, I first thought scorching ray. Power word pain never came to mind to put on a wand.

If that's your preference it's OK. But consider that power word pain is one level lower (so could be extended in the same slot / wand cost as scorching ray) and needs no attack roll. So it is definitely better.


I used alter self to become an Avariel (a non-core flying form) because of the 10 min/CL duration, though at only 50' (average maneuverability). I could have also cast fly to fly at 60' (good maneuverability) for 1 min/CL. I preferred the longer duration.

Yes - but you also got it at a lower spell level. Which is one of my main points: non-core, you do not only get more powerful options as a caster, but also earlier, which could have a significant tier impact.


Swift invisibility is not on the Wizard spell list.

Yup - my mistake, sorry. I meant to find an example for swift/immediate spells that help casters a lot. You probably will know more than I do.:smallsmile:


As for playing with other non-core sources, I want to. I have over 70 D&D 3.x books and want to use them. I chose the abilities most fitting to my character, core or not, and made a character I wanted to make and play. Arbitrarily drawing the line without considering what I'm excluding or including seems awkward.

That is entirely understandable. The question of this thread, though, was whether there would be differences in tiers between just core and then adding non-core. So it was not my line that was drawn.

Truth to tell, though, eggynack got me thinking with his good ideas during the druid/barbarian comparison. I now see some very powerful rules options added for non-casters as well. Whether that means the tiers are practically the same would need way more testing and discussion. But that's probably too much to do here.

[Hurnn]

Core barb 17+ does lots of melle damage and thats it. Core druid at 17+ becomes the harbringer of the apocalypse, it only gets worse outside of core. The druid is a clear t1 in both environments.