Fighter types are scarier then mage types???

[ojayaba]

So my group is gearing up for a new campaign soon and we are doing an epic level campaign starting at ECL 30. As normal we discus character ideas with the DM. So far the DM has allowed:
- wizard/sorcerer ultimate magus with a Naga Crown(artifact). only restriction, no epic level spells until we start gaming.
- Fighter/rogue assassin with two weapon fighting

still up for debate with DM:
- Shade rogue assassin with shadowlord and self restriction of 2 pounces in a round so as to not scare the DM who doesn't know a thing about optimization.

banned:
- Frenzier Berzerker!?!

Did I miss something in the tier system or something?
Since when does a FB(unoptimized) case more fear for a DM then a level 30 mage with 27 and 30 caster levels respectively for wizard and sorcerer with the ability to cast 14!!!! 9th level spells and 5 spells a round?

This DM is making me sad/mad as they are scared of guys with sticks because when i can manage to full attack something and tricker sneak attack i might get to 1200 damage in a round(assuming i can hit with all my attacks and trigger multiple teleports in a round as well.

long story short, I'm looking to see about getting help in finding a way to point out/explain to my DM that he's a moron if he thinks that an assassin with shadowpounce is of the same level of power as a 27th level wizard merged with a 3oth level sorcerer.

So my question is, any thoughts on how to show hime that being a guy with some hit points will change i light up.

[animewatcha]

This depends upon how the player is handling the wizard/sorceror. Usually, TO has the wizard not really adventuring at all, but rather his astral projection is and insert 5 billion defenses here.

[SaintRidley]

Frenzied Berserkers get banned for being potential TPKs, not because they're too powerful.

[ranagrande]

Frenzied Berzerkers don't always play nice with others. If not optimized for Will saves, it's possible that the FB could take out party members in a frenzy.

It's a perfectly legitimate ban, in my opinion.

[Xerlith]

I agree with that ban. Frenzied berserker is not only weak, it is not a player character class at all. It is an NPC class. That is the only way to make it viable in a game.
I think you're being condescending on your DM while he appears to have a bit more system mastery than you think.
And I wouldn't even dream about playing a frenzied in that group. The character would be a dead weight at best.

[eggynack]

The frenzied berserker is indeed a weak class, but it is also an unfriendly class. As has been stated, a DM would be somewhat justified for not allowing such a thing, for the same reasons they would be justified for not allowing vow of nonviolence. These game objects force the party to change around them, and that's not always desirable, though at these levels, frenzied berserker solutions could stop being basic stuff like grease, and could start being ridiculous stuff like hide life, granting immunity to HP damage.

It is plausible, however, that the DM is indeed banning the frenzied berserker for the wrong reasons, thinking them overpowered. In that case, the DM is definitely wrong. Might be worth finding out which it is. If you really do end up with a situation where proving something is wanted, then shapechange and eventually epic spells are right there for the breaking. It's not exactly a hard thing to do.

[DeAnno]

At that level any FB is going to have a large enough Will Save to only fail on a 1, and quite possibly has the resources to negate 1s on saves through extensive rerolling or some other random thing. Even if he fails the save, as long as anyone as an immediate action hanging around they can probably disable or distract him long enough to get him under control. Having a charger type at levels like this usually makes part of the battle a minigame to actually let him connect; he shouldn't be easily capable of landing charges without assistance in any case.

[Necroticplague]

I don't get why it keeps being said that FB is weak. Frenzy is at least decent, and the power attack improvements are excellent (especially once you use any other PA improver, like leap Attack). Wish it would take less levels to get them, but such is life.

[nedz]

Frenzied Berserkers get banned for being potential TPKs, not because they're too powerful.

this. No more needs saying really.

[eggynack]

I don't get why it keeps being said that FB is weak. Frenzy is at least decent, and the power attack improvements are excellent (especially once you use any other PA improver, like leap Attack). Wish it would take less levels to get them, but such is life.
This is a frenzied berserker in a 30th level game with full casters, where there is some implication of epic casting in the future. Frenzied berserkers, in that context, are incredibly weak.

[emeraldstreak]

Did I miss something in the tier system or something?



Yup. Years and years and years of online argumenting why casters are so much better than mundanes. By and large, casual Joes playing with their own group only have no ability to tell what's overpowered and what isn't.

[DeAnno]

In the context of a moderately optimized game where someone doesn't want to cast spells and FB is only 1/3 of their levels, it has a lot going for it. Deathless Frenzy in particular is quite good if you have the saves to back it up, though Disintegrate is pesky.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Did I miss something in the tier system or something?
Since when does a FB(unoptimized) case more fear for a DM then a level 30 mage with 27 and 30 caster levels respectively for wizard and sorcerer with the ability to cast 14!!!! 9th level spells and 5 spells a round?

You answered your own question earlier in your post:


...so as to not scare the DM who doesn't know a thing about optimization.

[Urpriest]

Yup. Years and years and years of online argumenting why casters are so much better than mundanes. By and large, casual Joes playing with their own group only have no ability to tell what's overpowered and what isn't.

I still heavily doubt this. I don't really get the sociological situation that would lead someone with an interest in D&D to avoid forum culture. D&D is just so rules-dense, you have to research it for it to even be playable. There are so many weird ambiguities in the rules that aren't covered by the FAQ, so pretty much any D&D player is going to eventually use google to see if anyone else has figured out a solution. Do that a few times, read the threads involved, and you get drawn down an optimization rabbit hole as inexorably as a link to TVTropes destroys an afternoon.

I guess overall I just don't get how people even play D&D without participating in online culture. Or why for that matter.

[NamelessNPC]

I still heavily doubt this. I don't really get the sociological situation that would lead someone with an interest in D&D to avoid forum culture. D&D is just so rules-dense, you have to research it for it to even be playable. There are so many weird ambiguities in the rules that aren't covered by the FAQ, so pretty much any D&D player is going to eventually use google to see if anyone else has figured out a solution. Do that a few times, read the threads involved, and you get drawn down an optimization rabbit hole as inexorably as a link to TVTropes destroys an afternoon.

I guess overall I just don't get how people even play D&D without participating in online culture. Or why for that matter.

Thing is, this online culture and most online content is in English. I'm from Argentina and it is really difficult to find new players who speak enough english to access this gigantic well of d&d or pf knowledge. There are no wizards.com archives in spanish, nor d&d tools, pfsrd or anything else. The roleplaying spanish speaking online community is really small and underdeveloped compared to this, and I'd guess it's even smaller with other languages.
Not that this applies in this particular case, but it is something that happens to an important amount of people.

[emeraldstreak]

Dunno. I know many players and DMs who take pride in not reading anything online. Often this goes hand i hand with banning monk and fighter as being "too powerful".

[Astralia123]

Well I can foresee this campaign will not meet a good end. PCs are more powerful than the DM who knows little about power gaming, and it is a high-level campaign.

Such campaign may run several sessions at best, before the DM who feels challenged by his players and become finally too frustrated or upset to continue.
Well at least he has the option to throw slightly modified monsters from epic handbooks at you, to see if you can take out those poor things.

[frost890]

You also said the caster can not have epic spells until after the game starts. That puts the caster well behind the other epic lvl players. You also said the DM is bad about optimization, it is easy to look at a fighter type build and see how they might fight/behave. I have seen a lot of players and GM's taken aback buy a well executed spell. a caravan of eight 5th lvl fighters taken out by four lvl 1 PC's with ranged weapons and a entangle spell is one example. If used right spells can brake everything.

[Spore]

Well I can foresee this campaign will not meet a good end. PCs are more powerful than the DM who knows little about power gaming, and it is a high-level campaign.

Yup.

I made three character's for a short drow game around 15th level. The orc barbarian was removed from play by the DM due to similar reasons a Frenzied Berserker would've been banned (Int 5/Cha 5, tortured by his captors), the drow ninja was one-shot by a wizard having see invisibility up and the drow sorceress was killed by her own sister (a PC) and ressurected in a warforged body.

Oh, and the main plot felt like a side plot since the drow magus got enough money to pay for his quest to become a lich, the drow cleric raised enough power to almost dethrone her mother leading my pc to flee to the surface.

[Chronos]

Yeah, in this game, the casters wouldn't have their epic options, while the fighter-types would still have their epic... um... Someone remind me what epic options fighter-types get again?

[StreamOfTheSky]

Yeah, in this game, the casters wouldn't have their epic options, while the fighter-types would still have their epic... um... Someone remind me what epic options fighter-types get again?

Well, the fighter types get epic feats. Just like the casters still do. Except...the caster epic feats (automatic quicken, permanent emanation, etc...) are vastly better than the martial ones. And the 9th level spells are way better than the martial epic feats as well.

Clearly, the casters are going to feel weak in such a scenario.

[ojayaba]

So, after getting my internet fixed I'm back and able to reply.
Seems the DM is afraid of martial characters as a whole because he had a bad experience in 2nd... Beyond that, the player of the magus has chosen to forgo on the magus as they themselves felt it was unjust to be able to have so much power while the FB was banned due to "Deathless Frenzy".

Seems the DM doesn't have the foresight to remember things like slay living, power word X and any other save or die effects. I'm just glad that we the players fixed this potentially group breaking situation.
(although the player of the magus did brag a little about being able to kill off a few gods from the books but figured he might only be able to get away with one, maybe two before the rest of the gods noticed what he was up to and slaughtered him for his crimes.