How can one give Martials Strategic ability in 3.5/PF?

[aleucard]

To summarize, the barrier between tier 3 on down and tier 2 on up is the ability to operate on the Strategic scale; almost no amount of tactical ability (read: direct combat) will breach this barrier, and doing so presents the problem of either every fight being boringly easy or the rest of the party having to match your combat power to not die to an interesting fight for you. Strategically focused campaigns CAN be fun, but the fact that almost no classes besides Primary casters or specific builds (which usually incorporate Primary casting anyway, whether through casting directly or magic item shenanigans) can be relevant as more than a chess-piece for the casters in such a campaign is grating. The fact that such abilities would almost by definition improve a given class's options beyond Charging Pounce, Stealthy Full Attack, or Living Trap/Wall is a bonus.

So, what sort of things could a Martial be potentially capable of that at least put them on the map strategically, thus putting them at least in T2 territory? Well, Leadership and its many relatives could probably do it, but then it's not YOU that's of strategic importance, it's your goon squad, with most of the weight probably being carried by Primary casters anyway. I'd like something a little more creative than that. The only criteria is that whatever it is has to be at most Ex or light-Su as in Tome of Battle and it has to make sense for someone who's devoted all their focus to Martial things to have.

[Psyren]

If I'm reading your question correctly, it boils down to "how do I have more interesting choices round to round as a martial character?"

If your group allows 3rd-party, I recommend Path of War. Otherwise, play a gish of some kind. The purely martial characters just don't have as much to do in 3.P, and while this design paradigm has reasons behind it, it can be understandably frustrating.

[JKTrickster]

I think there has to be several parts to this:

1. The ability to cover large distances.

Assuming you want to accomplish strategic goals, it is unlikely you can do so at a local level. Whether we are talking about affecting entire nations, continents, or even whole planes of existence, you need to be able to transverse that distance quickly and easily. Otherwise, it doesn't matter if you have the power to affect something if you're never in the right place at the right time.


2. Even tactical weapons, if flexible enough, can provide a strategic advantage.

If your tactical arsenal is powerful enough, it can have many strategic ramifications.

E.g. It might take forever for you to personally topple a kingdom hand by hand (even if you theoretically could).

But you don't have to - just the threat of such an action would accomplish the same purpose (as long as you can credibly show the proper commitment and resolve).

Coercion doesn't have to be from mind control spells after all. A proper display of force, and the message of commitment, will ensure many goals can be accomplished (within a political setting at least). This assumes you can in fact do so (or lie well enough to claim you can do so). Taking down a kingdom isn't easy for most Tier 3s but optimized builds certainly can.

At that point, you would be a force of nature!

[Vhaidara]

The problem is that Leadership and soldiers is exactly how you become Strategic. It's a matter of scale.
Tactical value comes from the personal scale. This is where martials are good: Doing things themselves where they are.
Strategic value comes from the large-scale. Casters dominate this because of AoE and utility.

How do martials get large-scale value? Other martials. Since they can't be in two places at once, they need subordinates to do things when they do something else.

Now, as far as creative uses...
Supermounts. Get a cohort who optimized for mounted speed, as well as your low-level followers having relatively optimized mounts. They carry messages.
Infiltrators. Rogues, Ninjas, and Factotums built to sneak in/infiltrate a location. They steal documents, falsify them, and get out.

[Seppo87]

I wrote some ideas not long ago on this subject
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18049084&postcount=399
It covers both tactical and strategic aspects.
Tactical includes extra actions and battlefield control.
Strategic includes political relevance, with the ability to influence people and threaten large areas and organizations alone in order to be listened and obeyed.
Of course it does not mean one has to use them all. They're just that, ideas.

[Segev]

I have actually made an attempt (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BWI2n1Xg1okUhHNABnXN0yShhgRmRYp4vaUq2SI1Hp4/edit?usp=sharing) at this relatively recently. I'm still slowly adding feats as ideas occur to me from various sources of inspiration. A lot of the focus is on creating answers to the "invincibility" problem of monsters and NPCs with T1/2 capabilities. Ways to make credible threats out of T3+ creatures and characters even to T1/2 beings.

It may not allow a T3 to "be T1," but it definitely makes them more able to utilize T1's support than the T1's own minions, and to make a T1 have to treat them with as much caution as they might have to treat a T1.

[Urpriest]

Magic items are another good way to do this. Imagine Perseus flying above an army, brandishing the head of Medusa. All you need is martial classes that are better at obtaining and using magic items than the magical classes. Artificer is a good example of such a class, being the closest thing currently in 3.5 to a martial T1.

Another option is the realm of feats of raw strength. Herakles cleaning the stables by rerouting a river, half the things that Xefas's Teramach does, etc.

[eggynack]

The problem is that Leadership and soldiers is exactly how you become Strategic.
That might also be the solution. I'm not exactly sure how to make this work, but I'm thinking army as class feature. Maybe skip the cohort part, and just give the class a growing hoard of followers which you're allowed to command in increasingly interesting ways as you go up in level. You have your stuff doing commands, like quickly putting up a wall or breaking one down, and you have your combat commands, like piles of archery or locking down segments of the battlefield.

I don't have much experience with the game, but I'm thinking something akin to Pikmin. You have a pool of followers that are available to you, and a stack of command or formation abilities that you can assign them to. The number of followers you assign would determine their effectiveness at the task, and let's say that it takes a standard to set an assignment. Most tasks necessarily eat up a certain quantity of the time of the followers, so if you assign some followers to archery, then they're stuck doing that for let's say at least three rounds, though you might be able to redirect their archery as a move action. Similarly, constructing a wall takes a certain amount of time depending on the wall's size and the number of followers you assign.

The way I figure it, you'd probably want the leader to have some combat ability of their own, probably somewhere between fighter and a ToB class depending on how you feel, and you'd want the followers to be pretty generic. On the latter count, I'm thinking that you wouldn't want the followers to be particularly capable of attacking independently, though that could be an allowable and inadvisable function, and you'd want them to be capable of dying, though you can get more with some rest to recover your power to command followers to join you. Might make sense to make it even more alike to Pikmin, letting the followers you call up be a bit specialized, and you can call up a new set each morning.

Depending on how far you go with the command abilities, what kinda strategic presence you make available to this army, you could probably justify tier one or two status. That'd presumably require some really ridiculous command abilities at higher levels, maybe even some things that barely make sense (commoner railgun as teleportation tool?), but it seems like it could work. There could even be a sub-theme of machines, letting your followers create increasingly convoluted mundane contraptions at higher and higher rates of speed, and those could fill in some gaps. Like, maybe they could quick-produce fragile mechanical wings that let you fly around for a few minutes. Could make sense. There's lots of room there, is the point.

[JKTrickster]

I think there is the opposite way you can approach it: become a Hero.


Like Heroes of old, the ability to reshape the world with your bare hands.

Move mountains and rivers within a single day would be way more than strategic - it would be nearly cosmic levels of power.

A dragon is a strategic force in a world - not only because it has a large amount of wealth - but because its actions can have a huge ripple effect throughout the world.

You don't need an army - just the ability to affect large areas.

[eggynack]

I think there is the opposite way you can approach it: become a Hero.


Like Heroes of old, the ability to reshape the world with your bare hands.

Move mountains and rivers within a single day would be way more than strategic - it would be nearly cosmic levels of power.

A dragon is a strategic force in a world - not only because it has a large amount of wealth - but because its actions can have a huge ripple effect throughout the world.

You don't need an army - just the ability to affect large areas.
The army method definitely isn't an absolute necessity. I just think it's neat. My usual example of a powerful mundane looks something more like an artificer, throwing out normal webs in place of spell ones, and using a hammer to make earthquakes instead of magic. It's nice to have a really solid basis for the mechanics of this stuff, as opposed to my usual, "Most spells could theoretically be made mundane or extraordinary," spiel.

Incidentally, I'm now thinking that each specialty of follower would be uniquely capable of receiving commands within their "school", where the schools include stuff like combat and tinkering, but perhaps with more of an eye to balance, and more interesting names. Whether there would be a general school which all of your followers are able to take commands in, as is the case with psionics, is an interesting question. I figure that such a category would include tasks that could logically fall in each school that would be reasonably doable by a non-specialist.

[Coidzor]

The only thing that comes to mind offhand is some form of less-than-cumbersome organizational rules that allow one to form and run an army or spy network or something.

Though armies are kinda problematic in 3.5 and to certain extent PF.

[Sartharina]

Martial character's strategic value is in how they're deployed. Unfortunately, Pathfinder/3.5 encounter design tends to treat Martial characters as 'baseline' in ability, so that you have a stupid little Basic Infantry Unit to play around with instead of the Unstoppable Force/Immovable Object that they should be.

[eggynack]

The only thing that comes to mind offhand is some form of less-than-cumbersome organizational rules that allow one to form and run an army or spy network or something.

Though armies are kinda problematic in 3.5 and to certain extent PF.
I was figuring a new system of some variety, though I obviously don't have the specifics worked out on it. Really, I was thinking less of an army or organization, and more of a pile of mindless creatures that follow increasingly complicated and powerful commands. Brings to mind the idea of a construct or zombie army, except they'd probably be standard humanoids kinda treated in that manner instead of actual constructs or zombies.

The things that you're doing with these beings would be necessarily very much class specific anyway, as that's the whole point of the class. Spying and infiltration is definitely one possibility for their use that I hadn't considered. You could send groups on information and/or object finding missions, mirroring divination effects with something akin to gather information on a big scale. It feels a bit odd to do something like setting a basic DC for the retrieval of an item kept in a well guarded mansion, but then again, that's the kind of thing that wizards do all the time.

[JKTrickster]

But there is a problem with armies - it doesn't translate well in tactical situations.

Unless you're controlling a squad for everyday combat (and that's....odd) - armies have to be a strategic force.

But being a Hero? Accomplishing things that heroes could accomplish? That works in both situations (at least I think so).


Unless you make something that is Tier 3 and then tack on a special Martial only Leadership, it would just seem...weird.

BUT there is some homebrew that looks similar to what you're talking about:

The Azure Champion (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=9782873&postcount=22) - always wanted to try this one out :smallbiggrin:

[eggynack]

But there is a problem with armies - it doesn't translate well in tactical situations.

Unless you're controlling a squad for everyday combat (and that's....odd) - armies have to be a strategic force.

The army wouldn't necessarily be a massive one, though the numbers would have to be worked out, and I figure that you'd just model it with perfect mobilization. Basically, the way it would work is that each follower would effectively count as one point which can be assigned to tasks as long as they're currently unassigned. For tactics, I think of it as something along the lines of a volley of arrows acting as equivalent to a fireball, or a group of shield equipped soldiers pushing enemies around like a hand spell of some variety, or some of them could lay down caltrops and/or debris, making the terrain in an area difficult. There aren't many limits to how this could work. It might help to think of it less as an army, and more as a squadron filled with specialists of various kinds, capable of helping each other with specific tasks ranging from combat to construction to espionage.

[Seerow]

On the topic of armies that can be assigned to various tasks, on another forum I saw a Leadership fix that worked something like that, which I quite liked. Basically instead of getting a bunch of individually stated out followers, you gain access to a leadership pool. You can assign this pool to various tasks to accomplish goals. The effects of these tasks grow exponentially, while the availability of the points and the cap for how much you can invest into an individual task grows linearly.

For example you might have something like level + cha mod + misc modifiers for your Leadership pool. A level 6 character might be looking at between 9 and 12 points, with up to 3 points being able to be invested into a task. So your 6th level character who wants to command an Army invests 3 points and for those 3 points gains a squad of 10 soldiers. He can do this multiple times (so have 3-4 squads of soldiers), or he might grab a lone squad of soldiers, and invest the remaining points into other areas.

Meanwhile the level 20 character is looking at somewhere between 25 and 40 points, with a maximum investment of 10 points into a given area. Where the 3 points invested way back at level 6 earned you 10 soldiers, 10 points being invested at level 20 might get you an army of 100,000 soldiers.


Other tasks that you might be able to use your Leadership pool on include things like setting up a spy network, various diplomatic tasks, running businesses/making you money, creating large scale structures (3 points might get you a decent house, 6 a castle, 10 a major monument) or otherwise altering the landscape, and crafting high end equipment. Or you can choose to get smaller numbers of more elite units. Say you can spend leadership points to attract a level appropriate cohort, or can choose to instead of having an army of 100,000 level 1 Warriors instead have an elite force of 2,500 made up of various PC classes ranging from levels 3-5.


Another possibility is have using your Leadership pool deplete the pool, and have it refill over time. Some actions have high upkeep costs, others have none. Picking up a cohort, or having an elite fighting force might take just as much of your leadership pool as recruiting a large army, but are far easier to maintain. But keeping a large standing army at all times takes up a lot of resources. Crafting an item might have a big up front cost but no upkeep, while making a building or otherwise modifying the terrain would require an upkeep for a set period of time.


Basically you take the things that you could theoretically do with a large group behind you, and abstract it, and then set tasks that high level characters will actually care about and let the character with leadership make those things happen. So during downtime the Wizard crafts a ring of power, the Leadership guy gets his followers to make a Sword of Might. Wizard breaks the economy with wall of iron to get a bunch of money, leadership guy tells his followers to go make him money. Wizard uses divination, Leadership guy talks to his spymaster and gets a bunch of useful info. And so on. Sure there's things that magic can do that a sufficient number of peons can't, but when you're not actually keeping track of actual peons and just saying "I have arbitrarily enough to make this happen" it's amazing how much the gap of what can and cannot be accomplished actually shrinks.

[The Glyphstone]

On the topic of armies that can be assigned to various tasks, on another forum I saw a Leadership fix that worked something like that, which I quite liked. Basically instead of getting a bunch of individually stated out followers, you gain access to a leadership pool. You can assign this pool to various tasks to accomplish goals. The effects of these tasks grow exponentially, while the availability of the points and the cap for how much you can invest into an individual task grows linearly.

For example you might have something like level + cha mod + misc modifiers for your Leadership pool. A level 6 character might be looking at between 9 and 12 points, with up to 3 points being able to be invested into a task. So your 6th level character who wants to command an Army invests 3 points and for those 3 points gains a squad of 10 soldiers. He can do this multiple times (so have 3-4 squads of soldiers), or he might grab a lone squad of soldiers, and invest the remaining points into other areas.

Meanwhile the level 20 character is looking at somewhere between 25 and 40 points, with a maximum investment of 10 points into a given area. Where the 3 points invested way back at level 6 earned you 10 soldiers, 10 points being invested at level 20 might get you an army of 100,000 soldiers.


Other tasks that you might be able to use your Leadership pool on include things like setting up a spy network, various diplomatic tasks, running businesses/making you money, creating large scale structures (3 points might get you a decent house, 6 a castle, 10 a major monument) or otherwise altering the landscape, and crafting high end equipment. Or you can choose to get smaller numbers of more elite units. Say you can spend leadership points to attract a level appropriate cohort, or can choose to instead of having an army of 100,000 level 1 Warriors instead have an elite force of 2,500 made up of various PC classes ranging from levels 3-5.


Another possibility is have using your Leadership pool deplete the pool, and have it refill over time. Some actions have high upkeep costs, others have none. Picking up a cohort, or having an elite fighting force might take just as much of your leadership pool as recruiting a large army, but are far easier to maintain. But keeping a large standing army at all times takes up a lot of resources. Crafting an item might have a big up front cost but no upkeep, while making a building or otherwise modifying the terrain would require an upkeep for a set period of time.


Basically you take the things that you could theoretically do with a large group behind you, and abstract it, and then set tasks that high level characters will actually care about and let the character with leadership make those things happen. So during downtime the Wizard crafts a ring of power, the Leadership guy gets his followers to make a Sword of Might. Wizard breaks the economy with wall of iron to get a bunch of money, leadership guy tells his followers to go make him money. Wizard uses divination, Leadership guy talks to his spymaster and gets a bunch of useful info. And so on. Sure there's things that magic can do that a sufficient number of peons can't, but when you're not actually keeping track of actual peons and just saying "I have arbitrarily enough to make this happen" it's amazing how much the gap of what can and cannot be accomplished actually shrinks.

This actually sounds very neat. Any idea where you saw it?

[Seerow]

I think this (http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=55138) is it, but it looks like it's gone through a few revisions since the version I saw (and was referencing).

Now I kind of want to take this over to Homebrew and flesh out the original version.

[emeraldstreak]

That's such a weird question to someone who've seen high Essence Exalted in action.

[aleucard]

I personally don't really like Leadership for this sort of thing. In that case, you're less of a Hero and more of an Officer, and there's just not that much spark involved in that sort of thing. You can't really take them along with you for adventuring or other important things, anyway.

I'm thinking along the lines of augmenting the Ranger's Bow path (probably modify it to be applicable to whatever ranged weapon the user wants, or at least allow a variant for Crossbow-users and similar) to where they reliably hit targets at from ranges exceeding a spell's Long range, possibly getting up to if not over a mile by level 20. They should be able to replicate Fate Stay/Night's Caladbolg 2 attack at least once a day. They should be able to do and use the various tricks of any of the bow-using Comic Book Heroes (such as Hawkeye or Green Arrow) by at least mid-levels, and upgrade them later, all with no or negligible cost outside of sticking with Ranger levels for that long. Various types of combat maneuver should be available within the first range increment, and at least one at the choice of the Ranger should be able to be done with a normal attack as well (maybe allow them to switch which one it is with a couple minutes of practice/navel-gazing/etc.) by mid-high levels. They should be able to outright call shots, which modify the effects done if they beat the target's AC by an added amount (with the ability to choose an effect if they beat it by several times, multiplying the effect if they beat it by more; at higher levels, more extreme status effects could be inflicted). They should be able to outright carpet-bomb a given area with arrows at higher levels, with all sorts of various effects depending on the arrow type used. By level 20, they should not look even a tiny bit out of place being Class Archer by virtue of not being strong enough.

In short? They should be a ****ing Hero by the time they are about to hit Epic. Let the politicians play General, your entire job description is going forth and kicking as much ass and in whatever scale you could possibly want. T1's can do this, T2's can at least get their foot in the door, but T3 on down is hosed without significant op-fu. That's just not good enough.

[Shinken]

I think you guys are getting the tiers mostly wrong. T1 and T2 are not desirable places for game design, since they by definition break the game. T1 and T2 are not defined by acting on a strategic scale, they are defined by how manyu ways they have to break the game. Breaking the game should not be a player goal.

[Sartharina]

I think you guys are getting the tiers mostly wrong. T1 and T2 are not desirable places for game design, since they by definition break the game. T1 and T2 are not defined by acting on a strategic scale, they are defined by how manyu ways they have to break the game. Breaking the game should not be a player goal.

It depends on the game you're talking about. "Broken game" is not a universal standard, either.

I wonder how many people here have actually played strategy games to understand what Strategy is.

A wizard is capable of calling in reinforcements, warding areas against attack, creating new spaces to store material or personnel (Or just to create space), crossing distances quickly, moving things from one area to another, building things, terraforming the landscape, etc.

A fighter doesn't do much more than provide concentrated firepower or prevent firepower in a given area, which, in itself, is not to be dismissed (Except D&D craps on the Fighter by having all 'challenges' be tweaked to his level - DMs following guidelines never have the fighter excel at what he's supposed to do because they stick him on a treadmill). With the right loadout, they can hold gaps, destroy leaders, break through enemy lines, take down leaders, shatter elite forces, neutralize warbeasts, and protect strategic assets.

[aleucard]

I think you guys are getting the tiers mostly wrong. T1 and T2 are not desirable places for game design, since they by definition break the game. T1 and T2 are not defined by acting on a strategic scale, they are defined by how manyu ways they have to break the game. Breaking the game should not be a player goal.

The number of things that just completely shatter the entire game to pieces is actually fairly limited. The reason that they're called game-breakers is that they can easily invalidate tactical encounters while also being of strategic use, and most DM's think in tactical terms (whether they call it this or not is irrelevant). In order to do a proper game for someone wanting to play God-Wizard or CoDzilla that is actually good at it, you need to mentally shift gears entirely from just minotaurs in labyrinths to full-scale wars, though the type can be largely left up to you to determine. That is what a T1 with its training wheels taken off looks like. No, they don't need to do anything overly special to get there; that's why they're T1. This sort of crap is so prevalent that you need to specifically design your character to NOT be capable of this within 24 hours.

In short, there is world of difference between Shapechanging into something like a Solar for infinite Wishes and Teleport, and I'm not talking about spell level.

[Shinken]

The number of things that just completely shatter the entire game to pieces is actually fairly limited. The reason that they're called game-breakers is that they can easily invalidate tactical encounters while also being of strategic use, and most DM's think in tactical terms (whether they call it this or not is irrelevant). In order to do a proper game for someone wanting to play God-Wizard or CoDzilla that is actually good at it, you need to mentally shift gears entirely from just minotaurs in labyrinths to full-scale wars, though the type can be largely left up to you to determine. That is what a T1 with its training wheels taken off looks like. No, they don't need to do anything overly special to get there; that's why they're T1. This sort of crap is so prevalent that you need to specifically design your character to NOT be capable of this within 24 hours.

In short, there is world of difference between Shapechanging into something like a Solar for infinite Wishes and Teleport, and I'm not talking about spell level.

This is not correct, sorry. A Binder with Summon Monster vestige can't act on the strategic level but he's still t2. A Wilder can act on the strategic level but he's still t4. A Dread Necromancer can act on the strategic level but he's still tier 3. I understand the distinction you are making between strategic and tactical situations, but that is simply not the approach taken by JaronK's tier list.

[aleucard]

This is not correct, sorry. A Binder with Summon Monster vestige can't act on the strategic level but he's still t2. A Wilder can act on the strategic level but he's still t4. A Dread Necromancer can act on the strategic level but he's still tier 3. I understand the distinction you are making between strategic and tactical situations, but that is simply not the approach taken by JaronK's tier list.

Binder plus Summon Monster vestige equals infinite goons, albeit in limited numbers. If he gets flight, he can harass the ever-loving Hell out of basically anywhere that doesn't have the ability to target and eliminate people from over a thousand feet away, and for basically an infinite amount of time as well. That's ignoring all the various horrifying things that the crap on the Summon Monster list can actually do (and some of the worst probably aren't even SLA), ALL of which the Binder gets an infinite amount of the instant he gets access to that level. Not too familiar with a Wilder, but just about the only thing he's REALLY good at is blasting from what I hear, and while that may be decent tactically, he doesn't really have that much strategic access, and what he does have is too little to really matter. Dread Necromancer gets what amounts to Undead Leadership and admittedly not a whole lot else, and that has its own problems; blowing all your HD on a single beefcake also has its own problems, but shifts it into nearly-pure tactical ability. Doesn't matter how good your Tank is, it's still a chesspiece rather than the hand moving them.

Did I miss anything?

[Shinken]

Binder plus Summon Monster vestige equals infinite goons, albeit in limited numbers. If he gets flight, he can harass the ever-loving Hell out of basically anywhere that doesn't have the ability to target and eliminate people from over a thousand feet away, and for basically an infinite amount of time as well. That's ignoring all the various horrifying things that the crap on the Summon Monster list can actually do (and some of the worst probably aren't even SLA), ALL of which the Binder gets an infinite amount of the instant he gets access to that level. Not too familiar with a Wilder, but just about the only thing he's REALLY good at is blasting from what I hear, and while that may be decent tactically, he doesn't really have that much strategic access, and what he does have is too little to really matter. Dread Necromancer gets what amounts to Undead Leadership and admittedly not a whole lot else, and that has its own problems; blowing all your HD on a single beefcake also has its own problems, but shifts it into nearly-pure tactical ability. Doesn't matter how good your Tank is, it's still a chesspiece rather than the hand moving them.

Did I miss anything?

Yes, you missed a bunch.

You missed that the Summon Monster vestige only works once every 5 rounds and it's duration is capped at 20 rounds (because it works as the spell, no matter how hard some people try to argue otherwise) - if you're lucky, you have at most 20 critters at a time. If you use the "no duration" reading, you also don't have the clause in Summon Monster that allows you to control the summoned creatures. Therefore, either reading denies Binders the ability to operate on strategic levels that you claim. Unlimited Summon Monster is broken, yes - that's because it is ridiculously versatile, which has nothing to do with the ability to operate on the strategic level.

You missed that you made no valid argument on the Dread Necromancer, you're ignoring how it can easily expand it's spell list and even if it couldn't, since you have yourself admitted it has the ability to operate on the strategic scale and you claim that is what gets you in t2 and t1, it already disproves your point.

You missed that Wilder can do everything a Psion can do, but must specialize further than a Sorcerer. You can make a Wilder that operates in the strategic level, as much as Psion can - it just won't be able to do much else.

[eggynack]

Yes, you missed a bunch.

You missed that the Summon Monster vestige only works once every 5 rounds and it's duration is capped at 20 rounds (because it works as the spell, no matter how hard some people try to argue otherwise) - if you're lucky, you have at most 20 critters at a time. If you use the "no duration" reading, you also don't have the clause in Summon Monster that allows you to control the summoned creatures. Therefore, either reading denies Binders the ability to operate on strategic levels that you claim. Unlimited Summon Monster is broken, yes - that's because it is ridiculously versatile, which has nothing to do with the ability to operate on the strategic level.

I don't think the duration of the summoned monsters really matters. Once a summoned monster uses a spell-like, then it's as if you used that spell. If using spells isn't sufficient to establish strategic capabilities, then I'm not really sure what is. After that, it's really down to what spells you actually have access to, and what strategic impact those spells provide. It's certainly not anywhere near zero; I can tell you that much.

[Shinken]

I don't think the duration of the summoned monsters really matters. Once a summoned monster uses a spell-like, then it's as if you used that spell. If using spells isn't sufficient to establish strategic capabilities, then I'm not really sure what is. After that, it's really down to what spells you actually have access to, and what strategic impact those spells provide. It's certainly not anywhere near zero; I can tell you that much.

Be my guest. (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=9094.0)

Also, duration does matter. When a summoned creature vanishes, any ongoing spell effects it created vanish along with her.

[aleucard]

It doesn't need to last for hours on end in order to do something negative to the target. What's more, there's several abilities that have instantaneous duration or are otherwise independent of their casters after being launched. If all else fails, you may be able to ODST high-HP Summons and have them go to town immediately wherever they land, though despite how awesome that sounds it's probably in conflict with a literal reading of the necessary support clause if they don't have some method of flight.

Anyway, can we move back to focusing on ways that would work for giving Martials strategic ability in their own right? This discussion doesn't really belong in this thread.

EDIT: Just for a last thing on this particular subject, does using this particular ability break Invisibility? If not, a custom item of it or something else for infinite-length invisibility would be perfectly acceptable, especially if you can either summon things from at range, do so while moving a LOT, or summon things that start out invisible (or are effectively so, a thousand feet up is pretty far to spot something small as dangerous). You're far enough away that True Seeing and See Invisibility simply don't work, which means that you only have to worry about them once people start getting airborne, in which case you can either gain altitude and focus-fire on them instead or leg it and come back later. Not the most elegant of options, but it IS a solid one, and enough of an irritant to be a strategic option, thus resulting in T2 status.

[ace rooster]

What would be the impact of a level 10 fighter (think achillies type level of power) spending a week training the troops? Turning 100 level 1 commoners into warriors has got to be considered useful, and outside of the ability of casters (below level 15, then they start turning commoners into giants). Also, why are you considering casters as being in charge? Casters are generally high int, but in universe there is no assumption that high int characters always become wizards. There is no reason to assume that the best generals will be casters.

[aleucard]

What would be the impact of a level 10 fighter (think achillies type level of power) spending a week training the troops? Turning 100 level 1 commoners into warriors has got to be considered useful, and outside of the ability of casters (below level 15, then they start turning commoners into giants). Also, why are you considering casters as being in charge? Casters are generally high int, but in universe there is no assumption that high int characters always become wizards. There is no reason to assume that the best generals will be casters.

Because that is the goon squad that's doing the legwork, not the character itself. The only groups capable of being strategic considerations in their own right rather than what they'd be in bulk in 3.5 and to a lesser degree in PF from what I understand are Casters. In a very real way, the Casters have more right to the classification of Hero than anybody else. The primary reason that Robin Hood was considered a Hero was because he could and on occasion would do the things he did completely on his lonesome; the Merry Men were just assurance. In order to be a Hero in 3.5, you have to at high levels be the equivalent of entire armies just by being in evidence. Any idiot could just bring a ton of dudes, but only a Hero could be expected to be able to match if not exceed those considerations. I'm thinking that there are ways to give Martials that ability, they just need to be found and applied/made.

[Psyren]

I think you guys are getting the tiers mostly wrong. T1 and T2 are not desirable places for game design, since they by definition break the game. T1 and T2 are not defined by acting on a strategic scale, they are defined by how manyu ways they have to break the game. Breaking the game should not be a player goal.

No, they CAN break the game. It is not inevitable/guaranteed, and it doesn't have to be easy either. Indeed, most players don't - at actual tables, you're far more likely to see things like Magus get banned than Wizards and Clerics. Of the T1/T2 classes in Pathfinder, the only one I've seen get banned regularly is Summoner.

Even 5e brought back a lot of the typical T1 tricks, like Astral Projection (which still copies magic items) and removing SR so the Power Word spells become 100% reliable once you meet their conditions.

[VoxRationis]

The easiest thing would be to give them greater skill access. Forgery is a tremendous strategic asset, if you put enough effort into it. So are many of the rogue's social skills. It doesn't bring down mountains or lay waste to armies, but skill use can hijack an enemy's chain of command and bring new allies or new enemies into a conflict—or even start or end a conflict—if used intelligently.

[Arbane]

There is no reason to assume that the best generals will be casters.

Because this is 3.5 we're talking about, where the best at EVERYTHING are casters. :smallfrown:

[Jeff the Green]

The easiest thing would be to give them greater skill access. Forgery is a tremendous strategic asset, if you put enough effort into it. So are many of the rogue's social skills. It doesn't bring down mountains or lay waste to armies, but skill use can hijack an enemy's chain of command and bring new allies or new enemies into a conflict—or even start or end a conflict—if used intelligently.

Just massively improving skills—pushing all of them up to the level of Diplomacy, Knowledge, and UMD—and increasing the number that mundanes have access to (more class skills, more skill points) would be immensely helpful.

Another option, which I really like, is Xefas's Mythos (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?335295-Mythos-Compendium) system. You start off with basic abilities, like your rage making you stronger, but as you increase in level you get abilities like your rage making you an unkillable avatar of hate who spreads strife like a plague.

[Sartharina]

Because that is the goon squad that's doing the legwork, not the character itself. The only groups capable of being strategic considerations in their own right rather than what they'd be in bulk in 3.5 and to a lesser degree in PF from what I understand are Casters. In a very real way, the Casters have more right to the classification of Hero than anybody else. The primary reason that Robin Hood was considered a Hero was because he could and on occasion would do the things he did completely on his lonesome; the Merry Men were just assurance. In order to be a Hero in 3.5, you have to at high levels be the equivalent of entire armies just by being in evidence. Any idiot could just bring a ton of dudes, but only a Hero could be expected to be able to match if not exceed those considerations. I'm thinking that there are ways to give Martials that ability, they just need to be found and applied/made.

With their AC, multiple attacks, and high damage, martial characters are essentially one-man armies. The problem is that they get put on a treadmill and treated as the baseline most times.

[Vogonjeltz]

To summarize, the barrier between tier 3 on down and tier 2 on up is the ability to operate on the Strategic scale;

Virtually every action in D&D is on a tactical level. Some things are operational, or can be used operationally, almost nothing the players do is strategic.

How our players might fit in:
Tactical: "We're ambushed by bandits on the road, fight!" / "We're going to clear this road so the villagers can flee."
Operational: "We're going to eliminate these bandit camps the villagers told us about!" / "We're going to keep the roads cleared"
Strategic: "We're going to end the scourge of banditry in Narnia!"

PCs are almost never involved in strategic decision making because those are matters of statecraft. In D&D that's left up to Royalty/Generals.

[aleucard]

With their AC, multiple attacks, and high damage, martial characters are essentially one-man armies. The problem is that they get put on a treadmill and treated as the baseline most times.

The problem is that that's just not good enough if you want to play a game where the baseline for a Hero is where Casters are right now. My thinking is that it's at least theoretically possible to have a fun game where T1 is used as the balance point, but there is nothing but casters and caster-equivalents at that level. The best way to bring a Martial up to speed (which honestly they should have been from the start, as described by previous posts) without allowing for absolute cheese is to give them strategic options to the tune of Teleport and no-infinite-wishes Gate at appropriate levels, if focused for their particular schtick. There should be more ways of making someone relevant in such a game than crap like Ubercharger or something that could actually be more sensibly emulated by roleplaying (Leadership) that is largely mechanics-independent. This topic was made as a sounding board for ideas in that direction.

[Shinken]

Just for a last thing on this particular subject, does using this particular ability break Invisibility? If not, a custom item of it or something else for infinite-length invisibility would be perfectly acceptable, especially if you can either summon things from at range, do so while moving a LOT, or summon things that start out invisible (or are effectively so, a thousand feet up is pretty far to spot something small as dangerous). You're far enough away that True Seeing and See Invisibility simply don't work, which means that you only have to worry about them once people start getting airborne, in which case you can either gain altitude and focus-fire on them instead or leg it and come back later. Not the most elegant of options, but it IS a solid one, and enough of an irritant to be a strategic option, thus resulting in T2 status.
You're getting it backwards.
I'm not saying that Binders are not T2. They are very clearly T2. I'm saying that being T1/T2 and acting on the strategic level are not related.

[ace rooster]

Because that is the goon squad that's doing the legwork, not the character itself. The only groups capable of being strategic considerations in their own right rather than what they'd be in bulk in 3.5 and to a lesser degree in PF from what I understand are Casters. In a very real way, the Casters have more right to the classification of Hero than anybody else. The primary reason that Robin Hood was considered a Hero was because he could and on occasion would do the things he did completely on his lonesome; the Merry Men were just assurance. In order to be a Hero in 3.5, you have to at high levels be the equivalent of entire armies just by being in evidence. Any idiot could just bring a ton of dudes, but only a Hero could be expected to be able to match if not exceed those considerations. I'm thinking that there are ways to give Martials that ability, they just need to be found and applied/made.

Stategic ability is not about glamour. Improving the goon squad is strategic ability, and is something that casters cannot do en mass till high level (PAO, and all the borked that involves). Unseen crafters can duplicate mundane crafters, but even a high level caster would struggle to improve on the output of 500 experts. Magic items are too expensive to be used en mass. Raising an army is heroic, and though the rules do not cover it, training them should be linked to BAB. Homebrewing rules for training troops would certainly be a start.

The main strategic impact of a mid level caster on a battle is facilitating rapid response, deep strike, and communications. These are hardly 'heroic' anyway, with the heroics coming after the heroes have gotten there.

The impact of any high level character on a battle is often neutralising more dangerous threats. A dragon has an unlimited area attack, and enough DR that it is immune to all but seige weapons. It's frightful presence can disable a huge number of troops, allowing them to be mopped up easily. It needs to be dealt with by adventurers. That casters are best at this is not a strategic problem; it is a general problem with 3.5.

The other main role will be spearheading an assault on a fortified position, and establishing a beach-head. Again, casters are better at this, but not because of any strategic effects. It is a tactical issue (casters are just better tactically, but that is another problem).

The more I think about it, the more a strategic level campaign becomes about role playing rather than rules. A diplomancer will probably be stronger than any standard caster, and races like orcs would probably be much more willing to follow a strong barbarian than a pancy wizard (That the wizard is most effective in almost all situations is irrelevant). Think in terms of Aragorn recruiting the army of the dead, rather than fighting directly. Casters do not do this any better, as using magic to convince somebody of a fact is likely to lead to resentment. For working on strategy in a sandbox world casters are at no advantage, as there is no way to do it other than role play it.

The other thing that I realised is that the largest impact a caster can have is generally by casting planar ally to get a 'consultant' in. An astral deva has an int and wis of 18, and a BAB of 12, making it a good candidate for a general. The cha of 20 certainly helps with recruiting allies. From a balance point of view having one of the players being an astral deva is probably not OP next to a full caster. If you want to balance against a level 12 cleric and a wizard; an angel and a cloud giant would be probably be a decent party.

[Emperor Tippy]

The main strategic impact of a mid level caster on a battle is facilitating rapid response, deep strike, and communications. These are hardly 'heroic' anyway, with the heroics coming after the heroes have gotten there.
But it is an ability that only casters have. Permanent Telepathic Bonds alone are a massive, strategically relevant, game changer in the political, economic, and military spheres.

Charm Person+Hypnotism has incredible strategic implications in all spheres as well, and that is available at level 1 to a Wizard.

Casters can make themselves into strategic assets and threats as early as level 1, non casters can maybe manage it by ECL 20 if they are built right.


The impact of any high level character on a battle is often neutralising more dangerous threats. A dragon has an unlimited area attack, and enough DR that it is immune to all but seige weapons. It's frightful presence can disable a huge number of troops, allowing them to be mopped up easily. It needs to be dealt with by adventurers. That casters are best at this is not a strategic problem; it is a general problem with 3.5.
But a high level caster is that Dragon. Or he is setting up a system to track every single individual in a thousand miles in real time. Or he is creating an assassination squad made up of Pit Fiends, etc.

---
A caster doesn't have to operate on a strategic level, but all Tier 1 and Tier 2 classes have the ability to operate on said strategic level and in the case of the Tier 1's, can become a strategic threat within about 24 hours of deciding to be one.

[ace rooster]

But it is an ability that only casters have. Permanent Telepathic Bonds alone are a massive, strategically relevant, game changer in the political, economic, and military spheres.


Runners and mounted troops can do the job, though not nearly as well. Communications are only going to help an army of commoners to a point though, and deep strike needs targets to hit. When fighting back a massive unled horde that moves slowly (timescale of days) communications are not a limiting factor for a mundane army. With good scouts very rapid response should not be required.

The implications of good communications are huge, but it is an overstatement to say that communications do not exist without magic.



Charm Person+Hypnotism has incredible strategic implications in all spheres as well, and that is available at level 1 to a Wizard.

If you could elaborate on this I would be grateful. There are plenty of tactic uses, but I don't see how you avoid the DC25 sense motive check for somebody to realise that something is up. Many rulers would behead somebody who suggested it, but there are many who would get their adept to check them out anyway. It would seem a decent precaution to do it anyway after any meeting with a wizard. I can't see this going any way but badly, but I may be missing a trick.



Casters can make themselves into strategic assets and threats as early as level 1, non casters can maybe manage it by ECL 20 if they are built right.


Unless they are in charge, in which case their class and individual wealth is irrelevant. In universe there is no reason to expect the tactically and strategicaly savy to be casters, but in metagame terms, the most tactically savy players tend to play casters. Being in charge is pure roleplay, so there are very few rules you can make that will boost non casters. The only one that comes to mind is not letting tactically minded players play casters, on the grounds that their (the player's) tactical savvy is not reflected by their BAB. I don't see this being popular.



But a high level caster is that Dragon. Or he is setting up a system to track every single individual in a thousand miles in real time. Or he is creating an assassination squad made up of Pit Fiends, etc.

Ignoring the monstrosity that is shapechange, and other 9th level spells (at which point I will grant you, the caster can just be a dragon), how do you panic a 300ft corridor at CR 9 (young adult black dragon), traveling at 300ft per round? How do you do it all day?

Tracking the million orcs heading towards you is not that helpful if everybody already knows about it. Incidently, this sounds cool, can we get a link?

How are you getting the pit fiends? If it using an ally type spell, then all you are doing is appealing for allies, which anyone can do. If it is a binding spell, then you are going to have to do some serious trickery to avoid repercutions. By the nature of the service you are putting them to, you are revealing an objective of yours to them. They do not have to attack you personally to hurt your agenda, and you will likely encourage good outsiders onto the other side.

Of the three things you listed, one has a direct impact on a battle (though the other two can be huge). At mid levels a caster cannot achieve even that (At least not to the level of an actual dragon).



A caster doesn't have to operate on a strategic level, but all Tier 1 and Tier 2 classes have the ability to operate on said strategic level and in the case of the Tier 1's, can become a strategic threat within about 24 hours of deciding to be one.

Any character can operate on a strategic level, if they are prepared to role play power. In many cases there will be casters for hire that can achieve the low level things you talk about. It is very difficult to include this in the rules, much less make martials better at it.

[eggynack]

Of the three things you listed, one has a direct impact on a battle (though the other two can be huge). At mid levels a caster cannot achieve even that (At least not to the level of an actual dragon).

At level nine, for that is apparently the level we're working with, faced off against our theoretical battle, our noble druid casts blizzard. After a round, snow starts to fall, shutting off all ranged attacks, as well as all visibility, making it marginally harder to move, and even dealing a bit of non-lethal, all in either a 900 ft. or 760 ft. radius, depending on how you read things. After nine rounds, the snow stops falling, and there are nine feet of snow covering that same segment of the battlefield, enough to completely screw up the movement of any creature in that area. That's one spell, on one round, and it doesn't interfere at all with the druid's ability to cast a second spell on the next round, whether it be control winds, or another blizzard, or call avalanche, or even blood snow. In two levels, the druid upgrades to spontaneous earthquakes.

[ace rooster]

At level nine, for that is apparently the level we're working with, faced off against our theoretical battle, our noble druid casts blizzard. After a round, snow starts to fall, shutting off all ranged attacks, as well as all visibility, making it marginally harder to move, and even dealing a bit of non-lethal, all in either a 900 ft. or 760 ft. radius, depending on how you read things. After nine rounds, the snow stops falling, and there are nine feet of snow covering that same segment of the battlefield, enough to completely screw up the movement of any creature in that area. That's one spell, on one round, and it doesn't interfere at all with the druid's ability to cast a second spell on the next round, whether it be control winds, or another blizzard, or call avalanche, or even blood snow. In two levels, the druid upgrades to spontaneous earthquakes.

Lets boost him a bit, and let him cast his spell with a radius of 300m 15 times a day. How much of an impact will this have on a million orcs attacking in 10000 warbands over a front 100 miles long? Druids are one of the more terrifying caster types in an open battle, but they are not nearly as effective as a dragon, simply because a dragon can use it's breath weapon over a thousand times a day without even landing.

That 5th level spell slot is probably better spent on trying to neutralise an enemy dragon, even with it's crazy effectiveness against mooks.

[eggynack]

Lets boost him a bit, and let him cast his spell with a radius of 300m 15 times a day. How much of an impact will this have on a million orcs attacking in 10000 warbands over a front 100 miles long? Druids are one of the more terrifying caster types in an open battle, but they are not nearly as effective as a dragon, simply because a dragon can use it's breath weapon over a thousand times a day without even landing.

How much impact on this crazy army do you hope to have with a thousand uses of your breath weapon? We're talking an 80 ft. line here, which means that the dragon is either right on or right over the ground, which means that he'll likely die to something, or he's only getting a few orcs each shot. If he's lucky, seriously lucky, those uses will hit ten orcs apiece, meaning that he's cutting down one percent of the army in a given day.

I'd much prefer something like blizzard, or wall of salt, which can have long term impact on the battlefield, hitting anyone who crosses that region of the battlefield. I was figuring an enemy of somewhat smaller scale, but when you get to the level you're talking about, you need that sort of long term fortification more than you need anything like a breath weapon, and the same is true of divination effects. What you need, at that level of conflict, is spells, and a whole lot of them.

[ace rooster]

How much impact on this crazy army do you hope to have with a thousand uses of your breath weapon? We're talking an 80 ft. line here, which means that the dragon is either right on or right over the ground, which means that he'll likely die to something, or he's only getting a few orcs each shot. If he's lucky, seriously lucky, those uses will hit ten orcs apiece, meaning that he's cutting down one percent of the army in a given day.

I'd much prefer something like blizzard, or wall of salt, which can have long term impact on the battlefield, hitting anyone who crosses that region of the battlefield. I was figuring an enemy of somewhat smaller scale, but when you get to the level you're talking about, you need that sort of long term fortification more than you need anything like a breath weapon, and the same is true of divination effects. What you need, at that level of conflict, is spells, and a whole lot of them.

lol, I meant to go for a dragon with a cone weapon. A line does take much longer. (though can still be metabreathed right) :smallredface: He will still be able to make a dent in it in a few days, which is no small feat for a single monster.

If you want long term fortifications then all casters spend all their time crafting lyres of building. :smallamused:

At that level of conflict, you work with what you have. With enough spells, you can do anything, but you might not have that at your disposal. What you might have are half a million commoners, backed up by a hundred thousand warriors, a few thousand low level spellcasters, a thousand elite troops, and 100 casters between levels 3 and 10. A caster can make a huge difference in terms of logistics, but a good professional soldier should also be able to make a huge difference in turning the half million commoners into an effective fighting force. Both might be required to win the day.

[eggynack]

If you want long term fortifications then all casters spend all their time crafting lyres of building. :smallamused:

At that level of conflict, you work with what you have. With enough spells, you can do anything, but you might not have that at your disposal. What you might have are half a million commoners, backed up by a hundred thousand warriors, a few thousand low level spellcasters, a thousand elite troops, and 100 casters between levels 3 and 10. A caster can make a huge difference in terms of logistics, but a good professional soldier should also be able to make a huge difference in turning the half million commoners into an effective fighting force. Both might be required to win the day.
The problem is, as always, that the professional soldier has no mechanical ability that would make him particularly good at this thing. The caster can thus act with pretty much identical proficiency in that arena, and also do the other things. The best way to deal with this million orc army really depends on the specifics. What you have, what they have, what they're trying to take, and so on and so forth.

The nifty thing about casters, which isn't true of melee folk, or even really of that reasonably sized dragon, is that they can take advantage of any given set of circumstances. Is the war on a number of fronts? If so, then casters have unmatched mobility, especially later on, and can do things with long term ramifications such that they don't need to stay for their impact to persist. Are the opponents trying to seize a particular position? If so, then there may well be a choke point of some variety, either already existent or constructed, and something like a blizzard will hit any number of enemies. Does the opposing side have any leaders? If so, then killing them is likely well within a caster's grasp. Casters can do just about anything, is the thing, and some subset of that anything will inevitably be really good at handling problems of this kind.

[ace rooster]

The problem is, as always, that the professional soldier has no mechanical ability that would make him particularly good at this thing. The caster can thus act with pretty much identical proficiency in that arena, and also do the other things. The best way to deal with this million orc army really depends on the specifics. What you have, what they have, what they're trying to take, and so on and so forth.

Yes, completely. There is a complete lack of mechanics in this area of the game, and it has to be DM call. I can't be bothered to homebrew something, but making the 'goon squad' function better is definately more a martial area.


The nifty thing about casters, which isn't true of melee folk, or even really of that reasonably sized dragon, is that they can take advantage of any given set of circumstances. Is the war on a number of fronts? If so, then casters have unmatched mobility, especially later on, and can do things with long term ramifications such that they don't need to stay for their impact to persist. Are the opponents trying to seize a particular position? If so, then there may well be a choke point of some variety, either already existent or constructed, and something like a blizzard will hit any number of enemies. Does the opposing side have any leaders? If so, then killing them is likely well within a caster's grasp. Casters can do just about anything, is the thing, and some subset of that anything will inevitably be really good at handling problems of this kind.

These are all tactical considerations, which we can all agree casters are just better at. This is a whole different problem.

[eggynack]

These are all tactical considerations, which we can all agree casters are just better at. This is a whole different problem.
Except they're not really tactical considerations, or perhaps they are, but with ramifications that move over into the strategic arena. If you're able to use divinations to find out who's leading the enemy, scrying to figure out their location, teleport to reach them in an instant, and then whatever to kill them, and that either disbands the enemy or scatters them for awhile, what makes that less of a strategic consideration than breathing acid all over everything? The former is more likely to actually turn the war around if anything.