[3.5] Classes that are terrible [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Extra Anchovies

2015-05-12, 06:28 AM

You may be interested in JaronK's Tier System for Classes (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5293), a class comparison system almost universally accepted in optimization circles. Any game can work as long as it's balanced around a particular tier or two and the character's class choices fall within those tiers. The main difference as you descend in tier is that the players have to rely more on thinking through problems than on applying relevant class abilities, because relevant class abilities become fewer and farther between.

Regarding the general concept of "terrible classes", I'd limit that list to anything that doesn't do the job it's designed to do. Truenamer (see this guide (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?214115-In-the-Beginning-Was-the-Word-and-the-Word-Was-Suck-A-Guide-to-Truenamers) for explanation), CW Samurai, Monk, and Dragon Shaman would be what I'd put on this list.

paranoidbox

2015-05-12, 06:29 AM

Hello all

At some point I'd like to run a quick game where everyone has to play one of those classes that never get played because they suck so much. Duskblade. Dragon Shaman. Ninja. Classes that are just flat worse than their peers.

So, what classes should be on the list? I think the balance point will be just beneath Duskblades and Warlocks. Any class with 9th level spells is right out - sorry, Favoured Soul!

Spell thief?
Samurai?
Scout?

Do Duskblades suck? I was under the impression they had some use as a fairly optimizable gish.
I actually don't know Dragon Shaman, but I do see the class mentioned from time to time in a positive light.

I would add Swashbuckler to the list though.

Extra Anchovies

2015-05-12, 06:35 AM

Do Duskblades suck? I was under the impression they had some use as a fairly optimizable gish.
I actually don't know Dragon Shaman, but I do see the class mentioned from time to time in a positive light.

I would add Swashbuckler to the list though.

Duskblade is actually a pretty good class. Low T3 is the generally accepted position, because they can fight pretty darn well with only two or three feats (Arcane Strike, Power Attack, Versatile Spellcaster), and from there can build for utility, e.g. Obtain Familiar or Extra Spell (all those spell slots can make grabbing an off-list utility spell pretty darn useful).

Dragon Shaman tries to be a dragon-ish class and fails pretty terribly. Their only saving grace is an ACF that lets them choose draconic invocations in place of auras. However, their main draw (the draconic auras) can be picked up by any other class with a feat or two. A Dragonfire Adept with the Draconic Aura feats does a Dragon Shaman's job better than a Dragon Shaman does.

Swashbuckler isn't all that terrible, and has a fair bit of upwards mobility through Daring Outlaw.

sleepyphoenixx

2015-05-12, 07:00 AM

atemu1234

2015-05-12, 07:10 AM

Before you start you should ask yourself what power level you're aiming for.

Duskblade's are, as others have mentioned, at low-mid T3, which is the sweet spot for a lot of people. That's roughly on par with the ToB classes, bards and other classes with a similar mix of power and versatility.
Warlocks are a little below that, but can rise higher with some optimization.

Below that are the terrible classes, classes that are T5 or even T6. Fighters, Monks, unoptimized Paladins, Ninja, Healer...

One of the things that banish you to T5? The fact that pretty often you can't even perform the role you're build for. Read that bolded part again, and then ask yourself if your players will have fun in a campaign like that.

Isn't that the definition of tier?
1: Can do anything, at any time.
2: Can fill a nonspecific niche, but only one.
3: Fills a specific niche well, and are alright at some others.
4: Fills a specific niche well, and others poorly.
5: Fills one niche, but poorly.
6: Broken in that it cannot perform whatever niche activities it was designed for.

Komatik

2015-05-12, 07:27 AM

Isn't that the definition of tier?
1: Can do anything with overwhelming force and speed, given preparation time. Can break campaigns with surprising ease any given day if they choose to.
2: Can choose a nonspecific niche or two and do those tasks with overwhelming force and speed. Can break campaigns with surprising ease if built to.
-------------GAP IN RAW POWER----------------
3: Fills a specific niche well, and are alright at some others. Can actually be more versatile than Tier 2 characters, but usually more or less the same.
4: Fills a specific niche well, and others poorly.
5: Fills one niche, but poorly.
6: Broken in that it cannot perform whatever niche activities it was designed for.

Corrections.

atemu1234

2015-05-12, 07:33 AM

Corrections.

Thanks for the corrections.

Grim Reader

2015-05-12, 07:40 AM

Duskblade is actually a pretty good class. Low T3 is the generally accepted position, because they can fight pretty darn well with only two or three feats (Arcane Strike, Power Attack, Versatile Spellcaster), and from there can build for utility, e.g. Obtain Familiar or Extra Spell (all those spell slots can make grabbing an off-list utility spell pretty darn useful).

Also, a single dip in Sand Shaper adds a lot of versatility.

Mr Adventurer

2015-05-12, 07:43 AM

Thanks for some quick responses!

I was just looking for that Tier thread, cheers for that.

Yeah - I reckon Duskblades are slightly too good to be in this game (I don't think they're a good class, but that's by the bye; they're good enough to exclude here).

Monk! Of course! How could I have forgotten.

I already have player buy-in for this game; these classes sound great on paper, after all. The rest of the game will be tailored to this environment, too, as well as making sure these classes are playable without being overshadowed. And I won't be using XP, so I can down-pitch encounters without stagnating.

Extra Anchovies

2015-05-12, 07:44 AM

Also, a single dip in Sand Shaper adds a lot of versatility.

I leaned back from my computer and cursed out loud when I read this. Oh my GOD, how had I not thought of this! That's awesome! I'm starting a duskblade spell list extension thread!

Petrocorus

2015-05-12, 02:24 PM

Do Duskblades suck? I was under the impression they had some use as a fairly optimizable gish.
I actually don't know Dragon Shaman, but I do see the class mentioned from time to time in a positive light.

Duskblade seems really well built on first sight, but when you look at their spell list, you understand the problem. Almost only blasts, a few debuffs and only a very few buffs, with almost no utility spells. Because of this, they end up being a 3 tricks pony.

Cast a blast or debuff spell.
Attack while channelling a blast of debuff spells.
Burn a slot to Arcane Strike.

So, they are very good at doing damage, but really lack versatility and buffing. Because of this a Fighter 2/ Wizard 4 / Spellsword 9 or even a well build Suel Arcanamach can be a better Duskblade than the Duskblade.
The first thing you want to do with them, as others have pointed out, is to expand their spell list. Look for the specific thread Extra Anchovies has started (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?414835-Expanding-the-Duskblade-spell-list&p=19244007#post19244007).

The Dragon Shaman is different. It is flavourful and has a bunch of nice abilities, but these abilities are to few and don't scale well enough and the Dragon Shaman end up being underpowered. The Warlock and DragonFire Adept have the same problem to a much lesser degree. The writers have really over-evaluated the value of at-will abilities.

Corrections.
This is probably the best sum up of the tier system i have seen. May i save this to quote it later?

Firechanter

2015-05-12, 03:06 PM

They were probably thinking of Hexblades.

bekeleven

2015-05-12, 05:41 PM

mabriss lethe

2015-05-12, 06:02 PM

Don't forget the Soulborn!

This reminds me that I need to keep working on my "Guide to succeed when you're rubbish at something." (a list of tools, tips, tricks that can let any character contribute to any encounter)

Extra Anchovies

2015-05-12, 06:06 PM

Don't forget the Soulborn!

Ah, right, that's the one I was forgetting! That is a truly terrible class. Plenty of good fixes for it out there, though.

nedz

2015-05-12, 07:36 PM

The simplest explanation of the tier system is this:

Flexible
Inflexible

Broken Power
Tier 1
Tier 2

High Power
Tier 3
Tier 4

Low Power
Tier 5
Tier 6

In the past, I've also made more complicated guides (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18042844&postcount=6), but this is the clearest simplification.
Nice chart but the difference between T1 and T2 is that the first has strategic flexibility and the second tactical flexibility. I'm not sure that this distinction applies to the lower tiers though.

bekeleven

2015-05-12, 07:51 PM

Nice chart but the difference between T1 and T2 is that the first has strategic flexibility and the second tactical flexibility. I'm not sure that this distinction applies to the lower tiers though.
I think I know someone who would disagree with you:

Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing.

[...]

Tier 2: Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks, and while the class itself is capable of anything, no one build can actually do nearly as much as the Tier 1 classes.

Psyren

2015-05-12, 08:56 PM

Corrections.

While this is an otherwise good summary, keep in mind that some T4s don't have a nche - they are just slightly above average at several different things without truly being special in any way. Dragon Shamans for instance don't really have a niche, and nor do Rangers or Mountebanks.

Rakoa

2015-05-12, 09:44 PM

I think I know someone who would disagree with you:

JaronK contradicts the quoted individual in no way.

bekeleven

2015-05-12, 10:13 PM

JaronK contradicts the quoted individual in no way.
He said that tier 1s have strategic power while tier 2s have tactical power. That's correct.

It's also correct, however, that tier 1s have tactical power. This is because they can do anything a tier 2 class does. This random guy says so:

Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything
It's also correct that tier 2s have raw power on a strategic scale. Here, some other random guy agrees with me:

Tier 2 and above classes are only there because of one simple truth; they have massive raw power on a strategic scale.
So while what he said was true except for the "the difference is" part, it was also completely meaningless if his intent was to draw a distinction between the two tiers.
If you disagree tier1s can do anything, read the uncanny forethought/spell engine/absorption builds being posted in the sorc v wiz thread right now.
The distinction between the tiers, and it can at points get fuzzy, is that of flexibility. A tier 2 can break the game; a tier 1 can break the game on every axis such a thing can be measured.

gooddragon1

2015-05-12, 10:25 PM

There is 1 useful ability of the dragon shaman, free access to infinite healing up to half hp. It also can bolster melee damage by 1.

Troacctid

2015-05-12, 10:36 PM

There is 1 useful ability of the dragon shaman, free access to infinite healing up to half hp. It also can bolster melee damage by 1.

Neither of those things is particularly powerful. And it's not free--you have to waste a level on Dragon Shaman. That's actually really expensive.

Mr Adventurer

2015-05-13, 02:01 AM

Given that this will be a no-shenanigans, low-op game, should I allow Bards?

Troacctid

2015-05-13, 02:06 AM

Not if the theme is "classes that are terrible." Bards are not terrible at all. Certainly more powerful than Duskblades or Warlocks.

Story

2015-05-13, 02:26 AM

Ninja isn't too bad for a dip.

I was in a game once where someone had a devastating "Ninja" that went something like Ninja 2/Rogue 3/Fighter 1/Master Thrower 5.

Marlowe

2015-05-13, 02:32 AM

Given that they were only missing out on Rogue or Fighter levels...:smallbiggrin:

bekeleven

2015-05-13, 03:13 AM

Not if the theme is "classes that are terrible." Bards are not terrible at all. Certainly more powerful than Duskblades or Warlocks.

Disagree. Unless the player is a rather creative spell user, low-op bard is worse than duskblade and probably similar to warlocks.

paranoidbox

2015-05-13, 03:29 AM

Duskblade seems really well built on first sight, but when you look at their spell list, you understand the problem. Almost only blasts, a few debuffs and only a very few buffs, with almost no utility spells.

Yep, I see what you mean. Thanks!

Troacctid

2015-05-13, 04:00 AM

Well, it depends what level you're at, I guess. Bards can suck pretty hard early on, but they scale well into the higher levels, even at low-op. They also get more powerful the more willing the party is to pursue noncombat paths to victory. All other things being equal, a high-level Bard has access to a more powerful and versatile set of abilities compared to a Warlock, and Warlocks are supposedly at the top end of the power curve here--the gap is even wider compared to a Swashbuckler or a Hexblade. But if you have to get through the low levels first, the relatively backloaded nature of the class might end up being a fair enough balancing factor.

Of course if you're working under the assumption that your players are going to be noobs who have low system mastery and/or don't know how to play their characters creatively and intelligently, then it's probably a bad idea to restrict them to low-tier classes. For one thing, they won't have the proper frame of reference to appreciate the restriction--it'll just be arbitrary from their perspective, and lock them out of iconic high concepts like "Wizard who throws fireballs and wears a pointy hat" that they might have wanted to play. Furthermore, when dealing with a power or optimization gap at a table, it's usually more satisfying for everyone involved if you lift the weaker players up instead of pushing the stronger players down.

Also, most of the reasoning that would justify Bards would also justify Wizards and Sorcerers. Low-op players not playing the characters to their full potential? Check. Weak at low levels? Check. Okay, granted, the accelerated casting of a Sorcerer makes the class more powerful than a Bard, but is that really a bigger power gap than Bard vs. Swashbuckler? I'd argue it is not.

nedz

2015-05-13, 05:10 AM

He said that tier 1s have strategic power while tier 2s have tactical power. That's correct.
That's not what I said.

Nice chart but the difference between T1 and T2 is that the first has strategic flexibility and the second tactical flexibility.

It's also correct, however, that tier 1s have tactical power. This is because they can do anything a tier 2 class does. This random guy says so:
My comment was about HOW they achieve this.

Tier 2 and above classes are only there because of one simple truth; they have massive raw power on a strategic scale.

You can gestalt every Tier 3 and below class in the game together and it won't break into Tier 2.

Tier 2 and above is the realm of classes that can go "I don't like this city/nation/continent/world/plane/multiverse so I will remove it within the next 48 hours."

The same random guy - only with more context. He is talking about the strategic use of power not about HOW you access that power.

If you disagree tier1s can do anything, read the uncanny forethought/spell engine/absorption builds being posted in the sorc v wiz thread right now.
The tier system is meant to cover levels 5-15, so when do these tricks come online ?

Marlowe

2015-05-13, 05:14 AM

Anyway; on "Terrible classes". Try the Mariner from Dragonlance: Legend of the Twins. It's got a decent first level but the rest is a dreary mess of Rangerish-Rogey-Bardic-type abilities with a nautical theme that's worse than any of those classes.

bekeleven

2015-05-13, 05:26 AM

That's not what I said.

My comment was about HOW they achieve this.
I interpreted your comment as saying that Tier 1s have strategic flexibility in that they can approach any problem from the most effective angle, while tier 2s have tactical flexibility, in that any given tier 2 can jump on a problem and nuke it to the ground somehow, regardless of what that problem happens to be. And you used the words "the difference" because each one was unable to do what the other one could.

If that's not what you mean, please elaborate.

On topic, has anyone mentioned the Sohei? Wow, or the soulknife...

Komatik

2015-05-13, 07:16 AM

Also, a single dip in Sand Shaper adds a lot of versatility.

Uh, Duskblades don't know their list automatically, now do they? They get a bunch of spells known from their list, but that's it. Not to say Sand Shaper isn't useful for versatility anyway, but it and Rainbow Servant etc. aren't near as good as it's for Beguiler/Warmage/DreadNecro.

Scratch that, I actually read the text for Desert Insight. Yeah, should work splendidly.

This is probably the best sum up of the tier system i have seen. May i save this to quote it later?

Sure.

He said that tier 1s have strategic power while tier 2s have tactical power. That's correct.

It's also correct, however, that tier 1s have tactical power. This is because they can do anything a tier 2 class does. This random guy says so:

He said T1s have strategic FLEXIBILITY. T2s he said to have tactical FLEXIBILITY. Whatever either does well, they do with broken power if built and played well, and have enough power to act in both strategic and tactical scales. What he meant to say is that a wizard is more likely to be misprepared, but can prepare for anything under the Sun. Sorcerer-like classes are more likely to be able to make all of their resources apply at least somewhat instead of being stuck with one shot, if any, but have limits to what they can deal with at 100% power.

Petrocorus

2015-05-13, 03:00 PM

Given that this will be a no-shenanigans, low-op game, should I allow Bards?

It depends on what you mean by "no shenanigans, low-op". How op is taking Song of the Heart, Badge of Valor and Power Attack? Is this a shenanigan to PrC into Sublime Chord and Virtuoso?

I personally think the Bard is a solid low T3 class in Core. And high T3 / low T2 with splats and good op. They are out of the box the best class for diplomancing (and that can be huge), have a good and optimisable all-party buff, skills, spells with a correctly versatile spell list and some fighting ability (which really need some op to become good). I believe they do pretty well. Of course, if the party is a Monk, a low-op Fighter, and a Ninja, they might overshadow them. If the party is a Druid a Cleric and a Wizard, they will be overshadowed. But, overall, including them is a good thing.

Sure.

Thanks.

Mr Adventurer

2015-05-19, 02:26 PM

New rule: no multiclassing. Now what do you think?

As for the debate on Bards - I suppose I was using slightly lazy shorthand when I said "no-shenanigans, low-op". What I really mean is a gentleman's agreement that, even within the constraints of the list of allowed classes, nobody will use any combination which puts the character head and shoulders above their team-mates. This could mean a Fighter über-charger, optimised Inspire Courage with Dragonfire Inspiration, or what have you.

Shadowscale

2015-05-19, 02:31 PM

Here I was thinking a dragon shaman was fairly decent for its tier due to metabreath feats.

bekeleven

2015-05-19, 02:35 PM

Here I wa thinking a dragon shaman was fairly decent for its tier due to metabreath feats.

I think it is. Plus healing to half health is useful if you're in a low-magic campaign and nobody wants to buy touch of healing or play a binder?

Besides that they're basically a marshal, but worse for dips.

Flickerdart

2015-05-19, 02:35 PM

If you have an agreement that everyone builds to the worst character's level, then "does this class suck" is a meaningless question.

Deadline

2015-05-19, 02:59 PM

I think it is. Plus healing to half health is useful if you're in a low-magic campaign and nobody wants to buy touch of healing or play a binder?

Besides that they're basically a marshal, but worse for dips.

Also, I'm pretty sure you can get the Dragon Shaman aura for a feat if you are Dragon-Blooded. It's super awesome on a Dragonfire Adept (which is basically a Dragon Shaman, but better in almost every way).

It could be interesting to see how an NPC class, the Adept, would fare in your group of bad classes. It's actually pretty good, considering.

Brova

2015-05-19, 03:11 PM

The tier system is ... not coherent. Apparently Factotums are better than Rogues, the Beguiler is worse than the Favored Soul, and the Bard is the same tier as the Dread Necromancer. I'm also wholly unconvinced the Artificer is anywhere near as good as a Wizard in an actual game.

As a general rule, the Same Game Test (http://dungeons.wikia.com/wiki/Dungeons_and_Dragons_Wiki:The_Same_Game_Test) works for evaluating class power. It's a bit of work to actually run one, but you can eyeball most of it. Beguiler, Sorcerer, and Dread Necro are all on a level with Wizards (they're like Wizards who pick spells that are hardcore). Most other stuff with spells, powers, maneuvers, or other stuff falls in at about Rogue level. Healer, Warmage, Samurai, and all the other joke classes fall somewhere around Fighter or Monk.

Shadowscale

2015-05-19, 03:21 PM

Also, I'm pretty sure you can get the Dragon Shaman aura for a feat if you are Dragon-Blooded. It's super awesome on a Dragonfire Adept (which is basically a Dragon Shaman, but better in almost every way).

It could be interesting to see how an NPC class, the Adept, would fare in your group of bad classes. It's actually pretty good, considering.

No, the dragonfire adept is a warlock and not better in every way. People seem to refuse to even acknowledge dragon shaman. You can trick out its breath pretty nicely and some of the auras are fairly decent, plus it has ones other classes can't take, if I recall vorrectvly a dfa can't take meta breath feats either.

Mr Adventurer

2015-05-19, 03:27 PM

If you have an agreement that everyone builds to the worst character's level, then "does this class suck" is a meaningless question.

Nonsense - all anyone has to do is cast any spell of, say, level 7 or higher and they've instantly outclassed the Hexblade :).

Besides which, it's easier to work out who's on a par and then limit the optimisation than it is to allow anything and then require reverse optimisation. Seems obvious to me.

Deadline

2015-05-19, 03:41 PM

No, the dragonfire adept is a warlock and not better in every way. People seem to refuse to even acknowledge dragon shaman. You can trick out its breath pretty nicely and some of the auras are fairly decent, plus it has ones other classes can't take, if I recall vorrectvly a dfa can't take meta breath feats either.

The only things Dragon Shaman really has over the Dragonfire Adept are un-penalized armor use, a slightly higher HD, Medium BAB, and a couple of minor benefits. They both get a breath weapon (albeit the Dragonfire Adept doesn't get access to all of the best breath weapon modifications without some shenanigans, just most of them).

The Dragonfire Adept gets flight earlier ((Su) flight at 6th level instead of (Ex) flight at 19th level), earlier access to their breath weapon, and invocations. The Shaman arguably makes for a better party support class, but with the Draconic Aura feat, the Dragonfire Adept only lacks the Shaman's Touch of Vitality ability.

I mean, if you want to wade into melee and mix it up a little without your breath weapon, the Dragon Shaman is pretty clearly superior, but am I missing something else?

Edit - Now I definitely feel like I'm missing something. Am I missing an important Dragon Shaman ability? Misremembering a Dragonfire Adept ability?

Karl Aegis

2015-05-19, 03:48 PM

Nonsense - all anyone has to do is cast any spell of, say, level 7 or higher and they've instantly outclassed the Hexblade :).

Besides which, it's easier to work out who's on a par and then limit the optimisation than it is to allow anything and then require reverse optimisation. Seems obvious to me.

Then optimize for a game where you don't get 7th level of higher spells.

Do you think optimization is making a character that can beat whatever monsters are in book X before they can do anything to your character? Most of the time when someone refers to optimization it means "making a character appropriate for this game".

bekeleven

2015-05-19, 03:50 PM

Factotums are better than Rogues
♪ Anything you can do, I can do better... ♪

the Beguiler is worse than the Favored SoulLess powerful does not mean worse.

and the Bard is the same tier as the Dread NecromancerThere's some debate about this one but, on the whole, yeah.

Beguiler, Sorcerer, and Dread Necro are all on a level with Wizards (they're like Wizards who pick spells that are hardcore).Well a sorcerer (and arguably a dread necro) are like a wizard minus 70% of the stuff a wizard does, so yeah, kinda "on a level" I guess. The beguiler is the same except that instead of keeping the 30% most powerful stuff (like a sorcerer) it keeps 10% of the most powerful stuff and 20% grab bag.

As for the artificer being as powerful as a wizard in "a real game," I'm working on a guide to exactly that.

Shadowscale

2015-05-19, 03:53 PM

The only things Dragon Shaman really has over the Dragonfire Adept are un-penalized armor use, a slightly higher HD, Medium BAB, and a couple of minor benefits. They both get a breath weapon (albeit the Dragonfire Adept doesn't get access to all of the best breath weapon modifications without some shenanigans, just most of them).

The Dragonfire Adept gets flight earlier ((Su) flight at 6th level instead of (Ex) flight at 19th level), earlier access to their breath weapon, and invocations. The Shaman arguably makes for a better party support class, but with the Draconic Aura feat, the Dragonfire Adept only lacks the Shaman's Touch of Vitality ability.

I mean, if you want to wade into melee and mix it up a little without your breath weapon, the Dragon Shaman is pretty clearly superior, but am I missing something else?

Edit - Now I definitely feel like I'm missing something. Am I missing an important Dragon Shaman ability? Misremembering a Dragonfire Adept ability?
Mostly it's meant to be more of a secondary front liner and support, I know it's not better or even as good as DFA, the argument it's worse in every way and invalidated is where I disagree, sorry if this was a detail though. The metabreath is really what makes them useful in my opinion.

ComaVision

2015-05-19, 03:55 PM

Edit - Now I definitely feel like I'm missing something. Am I missing an important Dragon Shaman ability? Misremembering a Dragonfire Adept ability?

I'm not sure if this is what you're missing but you didn't note the vastly superior flexibility the DFA has with the Humanoid Shape invocation. I mean, neither class is good at melee but at least the DFA can be good at some things.

Flickerdart

2015-05-19, 03:58 PM

Besides which, it's easier to work out who's on a par and then limit the optimisation than it is to allow anything and then require reverse optimisation. Seems obvious to me.
You don't need "reverse optimization" for a fighter any more than you do for, say, a wizard. There are classes with very high floors like Warblade or Druid that would need it, but if you are also placing restrictions on optimization then you probably need to be asking a very different question.

Brova

2015-05-19, 04:09 PM

♪ Anything you can do, I can do better... ♪

Except, you know, the flask trick that lets a rogue play on an even field with casters. So, there's that.

Less powerful does not mean worse.

Kinda missing the point. The Beguiler is just like a Wizard, except it casts spontaneously from a list of spells that are hardcore.

There's some debate about this one but, on the whole, yeah.

So getting save or dies, free minions, full casting, and the most forgiving spell mechanic in the game is on par with ... 6th level spells? I beg to differ.

Well a sorcerer (and arguably a dread necro) are like a wizard minus 70% of the stuff a wizard does, so yeah, kinda "on a level" I guess. The beguiler is the same except that instead of keeping the 30% most powerful stuff (like a sorcerer) it keeps 10% of the most powerful stuff and 20% grab bag.

The Beguiler gets color spray and sleep at first level. What exactly is a 1st level Wizard doing that's better than that? It's not like the Beguiler gets worse at high levels either. And that's assuming you don't go Rainbow Servant or Shadowcraft Mage or something.

You're operating under the same delusion as the guy who wrote the tiers. You seem to think that having more ways to win the game matters as much as having those options at all. Seriously, the marginal difference between sleep + color spray and sleep + color spray + grease is just ... not there. Putting Beguiler and Factotum at the same level is an insult to the Beguiler, because the Beguiler can win fights with one spell but the Factotum can't.

As for the artificer being as powerful as a wizard in "a real game," I'm working on a guide to exactly that.

I am deeply skeptical of that claim. The Artificer's big deal is that he crafts items. That's either like having spells but worse, or broken as all hell. I guess having spells 2 levels earlier is nice maybe?

Kantolin

2015-05-19, 04:11 PM

I would like to note that, provided you know what you're getting into, several terrible classes can be quite fun to play.

Hexblades can do some fun things, for example. No, they're not as good as several other classes, but they're good enough at their jobs that it's okay so long as those 'several other classes' aren't standing on your left showing you up. :P

Deadline

2015-05-19, 04:13 PM

Mostly it's meant to be more of a secondary front liner and support, I know it's not better or even as good as DFA, the argument it's worse in every way and invalidated is where I disagree, sorry if this was a detail though. The metabreath is really what makes them useful in my opinion.

Right, sorry about that. That was hyperbole. The Dragon Shaman has its niche, to be sure. It's just that the Dragonfire Adept can, for the most part, do most of the good stuff that Dragon Shaman can do, plus it has invocation access (with some amazing invocations as ComaVision pointed out). And with a natural breath weapon from, say, Dragonborn as a race, they get Metabreath access as well. Their breath effects are excellent, and they can use Breath Channeling feats without shenanigans, so even without Metabreath access, they work really well.

Troacctid

2015-05-19, 04:14 PM

Then optimize for a game where you don't get 7th level of higher spells.

Exactly. If you start at a low level, there's actually a pretty good chance you'll never even get to the point where Wizards are dominant.

Personally, in my games, I just ban all spells of 7th level or higher. (You still get higher-level slots for metamagic, but you can't learn higher-level spells.) That puts a nice lid on the power level of casters. If you want to screw the lid on even tighter, you could ban 6th level spells, too, or even 5th level spells.

Mr Adventurer

2015-05-19, 04:22 PM

Most of the time when someone refers to optimization it means "making a character appropriate for this game".

This is not true where I come from :). (I don't really think it's true at all but that's by the bye...)

You don't need "reverse optimization" for a fighter any more than you do for, say, a wizard. There are classes with very high floors like Warblade or Druid that would need it, but if you are also placing restrictions on optimization then you probably need to be asking a very different question.

A Wizard has a lower floor than a Warblade? Sorry, you've lost me there and for the rest of your message :).

I would like to note that, provided you know what you're getting into, several terrible classes can be quite fun to play.

Hexblades can do some fun things, for example. No, they're not as good as several other classes, but they're good enough at their jobs that it's okay so long as those 'several other classes' aren't standing on your left showing you up. :P

Yes! Exactly! This is exactly what this is about! :-D

ComaVision

2015-05-19, 04:23 PM

Except, you know, the flask trick that lets a rogue play on an even field with casters. So, there's that.
The factotum can do the same thing, gets bonus action, and has native spell casting. Nevermind the cost issues of flinging multiple flasks a turn and the concerns of something smashing the umpteen vials you have with you.

Kinda missing the point. The Beguiler is just like a Wizard, except it casts spontaneously from a list of spells that are hardcore.

From a much smaller list of spells that don't affect lots of creature types. They don't have the alternative options that a wizard does when their go-to abilities don't work.

So getting save or dies, free minions, full casting, and the most forgiving spell mechanic in the game is on par with ... 6th level spells? I beg to differ.
Dread Necromancers certainly have a higher floor but an optimised Bard is nothing to scoff at.

The Beguiler gets color spray and sleep at first level. What exactly is a 1st level Wizard doing that's better than that? It's not like the Beguiler gets worse at high levels either. And that's assuming you don't go Rainbow Servant or Shadowcraft Mage or something.
The party gets a quest to go raid a nearby crypt that is surely occupied by skeletons and zombies. The beguiler is less useful.

You're operating under the same delusion as the guy who wrote the tiers. You seem to think that having more ways to win the game matters as much as having those options at all. Seriously, the marginal difference between sleep + color spray and sleep + color spray + grease is just ... not there. Putting Beguiler and Factotum at the same level is an insult to the Beguiler, because the Beguiler can win fights with one spell but the Factotum can't.
Why can't the Factotum win a fight with one spell? And versatility is literally a consideration in the tier system, so yeah having more ways matters with respect to the tier system.

I am deeply skeptical of that claim. The Artificer's big deal is that he crafts items. That's either like having spells but worse, or broken as all hell. I guess having spells 2 levels earlier is nice maybe?

Metamagic with wands/scrolls is pretty intense too, and they craft their items for free, and he essentially has access to all spells in the game...

Extra Anchovies

2015-05-19, 04:28 PM

This is not true where I come from. (I don't really think it's true at all but that's by the bye...)

Optimization isn't about making the strongest character, it's about making a character that most effectively does what you want it to. If what you want is a Spring Attack build, then it's not going to be as strong as an ubercharger but there's still an optimal way of going about it (e.g. picking Scout instead of Fighter for the base class).

A Wizard has a lower floor than a Warblade? Sorry, you've lost me there and for the rest of your message.

Except wizard does have a much lower floor than Warblade. A warblade can still attack with a weapon and deal damage about as well as a fighter or paladin, and even if they pick they worst maneuvers possible they'll still be useful in some situations. A wizard who prepares Hold Portal, Detect Secret Doors, and Nystul's Magic Aura is going to be entirely useless.

Deadline

2015-05-19, 04:29 PM

This is not true where I come from :). (I don't really think it's true at all but that's by the bye...)

Optimization, at least as far as I can tell around here, refers to "making your character good at the things he's supposed to be good at".

A Wizard has a lower floor than a Warblade? Sorry, you've lost me there and for the rest of your message :).

Yes, a "lower floor" means that it is harder to build a terrible Warblade than it is to build a terrible Wizard.

mashlagoo1982

2015-05-19, 04:29 PM

Has nobody mentioned Person_Man's Niche Ranking System? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?314701-Person_Man-s-Niche-Ranking-System)

nedz

2015-05-19, 04:50 PM

A Wizard has a lower floor than a Warblade? Sorry, you've lost me there and for the rest of your message :).

I've seen someone play a 12th level Wizard who almost only ever cast Magic Missile and Fireball. :smallsigh: And no, he didn't even bother with meta-magic.

Brova

2015-05-19, 04:51 PM

The factotum can do the same thing, gets bonus action, and has native spell casting. Nevermind the cost issues of flinging multiple flasks a turn and the concerns of something smashing the umpteen vials you have with you.

In order:

1. No, the Factotum can't do the same thing because it doesn't get sneak attack.

2. You can take extra actions to make standard action attacks once per encounter, whereas the flask rogue does as much damage in an average round as you do in your nova.

3. You get spells of up to 7th level and slower than a Sorcerer. What exactly are you doing with those?

4. 20 flasks of acid per combat over 260 combats at 10 GP each is a total of 52,000 GP. That's a massive overestimate on volume, a massive overestimate on cost, and assumes you don't casually break wealth by level.

5. No one is smashing your vials, they live in an extra dimensional space.

From a much smaller list of spells that don't affect lots of creature types. They don't have the alternative options that a wizard does when their go-to abilities don't work.

By the time that's a concern, you've got some combination of prestige classes that grant new spells, minions that kill those creatures, or Arcane Disciple. You want me to run a SGT?

Dread Necromancers certainly have a higher floor but an optimised Bard is nothing to scoff at.

So the fact that you can break a Bard in half makes it better than a Dread Necromancer, despite being worse in actual play? I guess I forgot that the best class is Commoner because of wish abuse.

It's not like you can't break a Dread Necromancer.

The party gets a quest to go raid a nearby crypt that is surely occupied by skeletons and zombies. The beguiler is less useful.

Beyond the simplicity of expanding its spell list, the Beguiler gets the silent image line, which has no trouble effecting mindless undead. Or glitterdust, haste to buff allies, or slow to debuff, or solid fog, or do I need to go on?

Why can't the Factotum win a fight with one spell? And versatility is literally a consideration in the tier system, so yeah having more ways matters with respect to the tier system.

Because the Factotum barely gets spellcasting that matters? What's your plan against a trio of Vrocks at 12th level?

Versatility only matters insofar as there are problems to which you do not have solutions. That's just not true of the Flask Rogue, or the Beguiler, or the Dread Necromancer. All those guys bat 50% on the SGTs, regardless of any concerns you may have about "versatility".

Metamagic with wands/scrolls is pretty intense too, and they craft their items for free, and he essentially has access to all spells in the game...

Metamagic item use is pretty nice, but that other stuff is just as doable by a Wizard and with less legwork.

ComaVision

2015-05-19, 05:07 PM

@Brova

The tier system assumes:
-No multiclassing, so what you can do with a dip or a prestige class isn't a consideration.
-Wealth is not a consideration. Any class can break the game on the basis of wealth alone.
-Legwork is not a consideration. It's irrelevant whether a wizard breaks the game with less work than the artificer.

I'm not particularly familiar with the SGTs beyond a quick glance so I will not endeavor to comment on them. The tier system is quite effective at what it aims to do. A Dread Necromancer and a Beguiler can happily co-exist and fill different niches, where a Wizard could perform both their roles (more or less). That's not to say that a Wizard couldn't choose to not step on the toes of a Dread Necromancer or Beguiler but it's simply capable of more.

Jormengand

2015-05-19, 05:16 PM

Has nobody mentioned Person_Man's Niche Ranking System? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?314701-Person_Man-s-Niche-Ranking-System)

Even just looking at the truenamer row, I can instantly tell that parts of that are blatantly untrue (the truenamer's ranged damage output, especially at low levels, is one of its key selling points, and it's rated a 4). We're also wondering why it's listed as having "absolutely nothing to support" controlling creatures when there are utterances that do that, or why the class which gets +LOLHUEG to its knowledge checks and has at-will scrying provided he bothers using the relatively easy truename research rules isn't listed as a 1 on sage, while the factotum which basically does the same thing but worse is, for example.

bekeleven

2015-05-19, 05:21 PM

A wizard who prepares Hold Portal, Detect Secret Doors, and Nystul's Magic Aura is going to be entirely useless.
Boy is my wizzrogue's face red.

sleepyphoenixx

2015-05-19, 05:21 PM

Dread Necromancer is a one trick pony. It may be very good at its trick and the trick is pretty universally useful but that doesn't change the basic fact. A properly build bard has a significantly higher ceiling.

As for Artificers, not only do you get access to any spell ever printed, at least two levels earlier than everyone else (often even earlier because you can use PrC lists like Trapsmith), you also can use a lot of them pretty much on the fly (Spell Storing Item infusion).
You also get pretty much free metamagic (Metamagic Item infusion) several times per day with zero effort. It also has a duration so you can get free metamagic on a wand for a whole battle for that single infusion.
You also get all the important crafting feats for free.

Wizards need to go Incantatrix for that and spend some effort boosting Spellcraft to reliably get meaningful metamagic, and with pretty significant restrictions (no Quicken, only on spells already in effect so nothing instantaneous), while Clerics need to spend one feat per metamagic for DMM and expend significant build resources to get more than a few uses out of it.

And that's not counting the effort to get even one different spell list on your character. Sure, you can cherry pick a few spells with Arcane Disciple (introducing MAD) and similar options, but the Artificer gets it all for free. If you know what you're doing and are capable of planning even a little bit ahead it is the strongest class in the game by far.

So i'll have to say that claiming a Wizard is equal to an Artificer (and with less legwork required too) to be pretty ignorant.

Brova

2015-05-19, 06:03 PM

-No multiclassing, so what you can do with a dip or a prestige class isn't a consideration.

Your point? Arcane Disciple is still a feat, and Beguilers can still take it. Not getting to go Rainbow Servant hurts, but your spell list is made of win. The fact that you can't effect Golems isn't great, but the fact that you can turn enemies into allies permanently is.

-Wealth is not a consideration. Any class can break the game on the basis of wealth alone.
-Legwork is not a consideration. It's irrelevant whether a wizard breaks the game with less work than the artificer.

Wait, what? What situation are you going to be in where it does matter how much money you have but doesn't matter how complex your build is?

I'm not particularly familiar with the SGTs beyond a quick glance so I will not endeavor to comment on them. The tier system is quite effective at what it aims to do. A Dread Necromancer and a Beguiler can happily co-exist and fill different niches, where a Wizard could perform both their roles (more or less). That's not to say that a Wizard couldn't choose to not step on the toes of a Dread Necromancer or Beguiler but it's simply capable of more.

You're going to have to nail down your optimization level, because there are things the Dread Necromancer can do that a Wizard can't (easily). For example, desecrate is on the Dread Necromancer list but not the Wizard list.

And again, it doesn't matter if the Wizard can do the Beguiler's trick from a power perspective as long as the Beguiler has a viable trick. In any given day you only do one thing with your powers. It doesn't matter if you could have bound some genies as long as what you actually did was charm some fools.

So i'll have to say that claiming a Wizard is equal to an Artificer (and with less legwork required too) to be pretty ignorant.

I'm going to focus on this, because it's wrong. The core benefits you've outlined for a Artificer are metamagic and spell access. Wizards have both of those. They can learn any spell (fun fact: the only restriction on adding spells to your spellbook is that you have to decipher them - they don't have to be Wizard spells or even arcane). Incantatrix gives you better metamagic tricks, as well as spell trigger metamagic.

Also, all this talk of ceilings in optimization is hogwash. The ceiling for every class is exactly the same. You buy a candle, you summon an Efreet, you wish for a magic item with arbitrary powers.

The actual question of class balance isn't "can you break the game" - because the answer to that is always yes. The question is "under what conditions can you make a build that is playable".

bekeleven

2015-05-19, 06:09 PM

I'm going to focus on this, because it's wrong. The core benefits you've outlined for a Artificer are metamagic and spell access. Wizards have both of those. They can learn any spell (fun fact: the only restriction on adding spells to your spellbook is that you have to decipher them - they don't have to be Wizard spells or even arcane).

A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.
But no, don't let me stop you from adding them to your spellbook.

Curmudgeon

2015-05-19, 06:15 PM

2. You can take extra actions to make standard action attacks once per encounter, whereas the flask rogue does as much damage in an average round as you do in your nova.
Actually, no; not by RAW.
Cunning Surge (Ex): Starting at 8th level, you learn to push yourself when needed. By spending 3 inspiration points, you can take an extra standard action during your turn.
Extraordinary Abilities (Ex)
...
Using an extraordinary ability is usually not an action because most extraordinary abilities automatically happen in a reactive fashion. Those extraordinary abilities that are actions are standard actions unless otherwise noted. Cunning Surge is not an automatic reaction, and the ability description does not note otherwise, so it takes a standard action to use. You spend a standard action and 3 IPs to get a standard action, so this ability is less than useless.

Now, it's very common to institute a house rule here (such as "Cunning Surge can be activated with a swift action"), but that's not how it works (rather, fails to work) by the normal rules.

Rubik

2015-05-19, 06:20 PM

Jormengand

2015-05-19, 06:21 PM

Actually, no; not by RAW. Cunning Surge is not an automatic reaction, and the ability description does not note otherwise, so it takes a standard action to use. You spend a standard action and 3 IPs to get a standard action, so this ability is less than useless.

Now, it's very common to institute a house rule here (such as "Cunning Surge can be activated with a swift action"), but that's not how it works (rather, fails to work) by the normal rules.

Yes, well done, if you deliberately interpret the rules in the technically true but utterly stupid manner in which they were written you get technically true and utterly useless results. I assume the discussion here is being conducted on rules that a DM with his head attached firmly to their respective neck would actually consider using, not the "This is technically true" rules that actually make no sense when you think about them for five seconds.

Also, RAW, this could just mean that you take the extra standard action - which is indeed a standard action, it's just an extra one that doesn't cost you your normal standard action - by spending 3 IP. That is, you can take a standard action you don't have but doing so costs you 3 IP, which would be an equally RAW and far less nonsensical form of the rules.

Brova

2015-05-19, 06:27 PM

But no, don't let me stop you from adding them to your spellbook.

First, the scribing:

A wizard can also add a spell to her book whenever she encounters one on a magic scroll or in another wizard’s spellbook. No matter what the spell’s source, the wizard must first decipher the magical writing (see Arcane Magical Writings, above). Next, she must spend a day studying the spell. At the end of the day, she must make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell’s level). A wizard who has specialized in a school of spells gains a +2 bonus on the Spellcraft check if the new spell is from her specialty school. She cannot, however, learn any spells from her prohibited schools. If the check succeeds, the wizard understands the spell and can copy it into her spellbook (see Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook, below). The process leaves a spellbook that was copied from unharmed, but a spell successfully copied from a magic scroll disappears from the parchment.

Now, there are some restrictions there. For example, you can't scribe a spell that's of a prohibited school. You also have to make a Spellcraft check. But the spells you scribe don't have to be Wizard spells. They don't even have to be Arcane.

Second, the casting:

To learn, prepare, or cast a spell, the wizard must have an Intelligence score equal to at least 10 + the spell level. The Difficulty Class for a saving throw against a wizard’s spell is 10 + the spell level + the wizard’s Intelligence modifier.

You'll note that there are again no restrictions on casting spells that aren't arcane. You if you have an Int of 15, you can jolly well cast awaken whether it's Arcane or not. The only restriction on your spells is having them in your spellbook.

Curmudgeon

2015-05-19, 06:33 PM

Otherwise, like you said, it'd be stupid and useless.
But it is stupid and useless; that's a description that applies to the Factotum class generally.
The target automatically fails any spell resistance check that she attempts to avoid your spell. There's no mechanism like that anywhere in D&D.

As you said, stupid and useless.

Brova

2015-05-19, 06:42 PM

But it is stupid and useless; that's a description that applies to the Factotum class generally. There's no mechanism like that anywhere in D&D.

As you said, stupid and useless.

For all that you are totally right about the Factotum being unusable poorly written (my favorite example is IP gain), I don't think this was ever really intended to be a strictly RAW discussion. As such, I would assume we're giving a good deal of leeway to the Factotum.

Petrocorus

2015-05-19, 06:46 PM

In order:
1. No, the Factotum can't do the same thing because it doesn't get sneak attack.

4. 20 flasks of acid per combat over 260 combats at 10 GP each is a total of 52,000 GP. That's a massive overestimate on volume, a massive overestimate on cost, and assumes you don't casually break wealth by level.

I'm sorry, but i don't really understand that flask rogue thing?

Brova

2015-05-19, 06:52 PM

I'm sorry, but i don't really understand that flask rogue thing?

You take Rapid Shot and Two-Weapon Fighting, then throw flasks at stuff. Use a ring of blinking to get sneak attack. At 10th level you're throwing down with like five attacks a round for 6d6 each with nothing other than that. That's not quite killing a Vrock in one round, but it's close. There's some other optimization to do, but the basic build is 100% core.

The build is also referred to as the Halfling Hurler (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Halfling_Hurler_%283.5e_Optimized_Character_Build% 29).

Curmudgeon

2015-05-19, 07:21 PM

You take Rapid Shot and Two-Weapon Fighting, then throw flasks at stuff. Use a ring of blinking to get sneak attack. At 10th level you're throwing down with like five attacks a round for 6d6 each with nothing other than that.
I don't think it works all that well, myself, and your "with nothing other than that" remark is inaccurate. The minimum cost of ammunition (using acid instead of alchemist's fire) is 10 gp/shot (50 gp/round). You waste 20% of all shots by throwing them on the Ethereal Plane. Your feat slots are all dedicated to your attacks if you want 5 shots per round (Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Quick Draw, Two-Weapon Fighting) as well as a big chunk of your equipment budget (Ring of Blinking, Gloves of the Balanced Hand). You don't get any sneak attack beyond 30', so it's easy for enemies to just move away from you and your pathetic 15' speed (Halfling base 20', reduced to 3/4 by Blink). Any concealment removes your sneak attack also, so casting Darkness or Deeper Darkness is an easy counter. (Deeper Darkness cast on a weapon tip days beforehand means radiating shadowy illumination in a 60' radius just by drawing the weapon from its scabbard.)

bekeleven

2015-05-19, 07:37 PM

You'll note that there are again no restrictions on casting spells that aren't arcane. You if you have an Int of 15, you can jolly well cast awaken whether it's Arcane or not. The only restriction on your spells is having them in your spellbook.

If you're claiming that that's the only sentence in the SRD that govern wizard spellcasting, then why copy them into your spellbook in the first place? You can cast spells you don't know just as easily. Assuming you have the int score, that is.

Or, maybe, there's more than 1 sentence in the book restricting what spells wizards can cast, which you're admitting when you're attempting to copy spells into your spellbook.

Here, I found one of them:

A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.

Brova

2015-05-19, 08:49 PM

@Curmudgeon:

The feats are tight, but you can make up for some stuff with optimization. 20% to miss hurts, but you still hit pretty hard. You don't actually need any item other than a ring of blinking, you're getting Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting as a bonus feat.

SGT:

You beat the traps because you're a Rogue, you beat the Trolls because your default weapon is acid, you beat the dragon because of evasion and DPS. 2 Sure Wins, 1 Probable Win

You might beat the Fire Giant, Bebilith or Vrock if you have the DPS. The Necromancer loses if you get to hit him, but that matchup is heavily dependent on spells. Hard to call overall, probably slightly favored for Fire Giant and Necromancer, slightly disfavored for Vrock and Bebilith.

The Mind Flayers are pretty solid to get you, but you do win if you get to hit them. You're not beating the Shadows bar some kind of item. 1 Probable Loss, 1 Sure Loss

That's pretty close to even, and this is a core only build. If you add stuff like the Halfling Rogue ACF, heroics for that Shadow Hand stance, or other options to boost DPS you can shift the Fire Giant into probable win territory.

If you're claiming that that's the only sentence in the SRD that govern wizard spellcasting, then why copy them into your spellbook in the first place? You can cast spells you don't know just as easily. Assuming you have the int score, that is.

Well, there's also the restriction that "She cannot prepare any spell not recorded in her spellbook, except for read magic, which all wizards can prepare from memory."

Also worth noting that a Wizard is allowed to research new spells, which are clearly not on the Sorcerer/Wizard spell list. And of course, Wizards can add non-Wizard spells to their list by becoming Rainbow Servants, or taking Arcane Disciple.

Curmudgeon

2015-05-19, 09:12 PM

Extra Anchovies

2015-05-19, 09:17 PM

No, you're not.

IIRC, the build uses Rogue special abilities to get Perfect TWF at 10th level. Not sure on the legality of that.

Curmudgeon

2015-05-19, 09:23 PM

IIRC, the build uses Rogue special abilities to get Perfect TWF at 10th level. Not sure on the legality of that.

Feat: A rogue may gain a bonus feat in place of a special ability.
There's no exception to the rule I quoted above.

Story

2015-05-20, 12:50 AM

To pick a random example, how does the Flask Rogue fight off a Young Black Dragon attacking an airship? How about when you need to explore a sunken pirate ship and fight off giant octopi? Or since you think Vrocks are easy, how would you fight an Erinye in a large open space?

The problem is that your rogue has only one trick. It's a powerful trick when it works, but it's hardly on the level of classes that have a dozen tricks or can swap their build out on a daily basis.

P.S. You did remember to account for the Vrock's Mirror Images and energy resistance, right?

Mr Adventurer

2015-05-20, 02:59 AM

Karl Aegis

2015-05-20, 03:12 AM

Great discussions here but nothing really to do with the topic! :)

Here's my list of classes so far; what's missing?

Hexblade
Ninja
Scout
Samurai
Monk
Spellthief
Soulknife
Dragon Shaman
Swashbuckler

Fighter
Divine Mind
Soulborn
Truenamer (don't play truenamer, actually)
Healer
Aristocrat
Adept
Lurk
Paladin
Knight
Sohei
Noble
Montebank
Totemist
Marshal
Savant
Jester
Master
Nightstalker
Battledancer
Warmage

Grim Reader

2015-05-20, 03:19 AM

Kinda missing the point. The Beguiler is just like a Wizard, except it casts spontaneously from a list of spells that are hardcore.

Fairly sure the wizard can cover the Beguiler job. And spell list. The reverse is not true.

The tier systems, as far as I know, measures versatility with capacity to break the game as an additional qualifier to get into the two top tiers. I really don't see how anyone can advance an argument that the Beguiler can keep up with the Wizards versatility.

Great discussions here but nothing really to do with the topic! :)

Here's my list of classes so far; what's missing?

Hexblade
Ninja
Scout
Samurai
Monk
Spellthief
Soulknife
Dragon Shaman
Swashbuckler

Shadowcaster?

Troacctid

2015-05-20, 03:44 AM

Fighter, Divine Mind, Paladin, Soulborn, Marshal, and Adept are all in line with the classes you've listed. (Maybe disallow the Ectopic Ally variant for Divine Minds.) If Dragon Compendium is in play, so are Mountebank and Battle Dancer. Also, if you have Scout and Spellthief, you should have Rogue, too, as they're very close in power.

Curmudgeon

2015-05-20, 04:08 AM

If Dragon Compendium is in play, so are Mountebank and Battle Dancer.
Dragon Compendium Mountebank was obsoleted when Complete Scoundrel replaced the class.

atemu1234

2015-05-20, 06:04 AM

Dragon Compendium Mountebank was obsoleted when Complete Scoundrel replaced the class.

No, that was just a prestige class with the same name.

Brova

2015-05-20, 06:22 AM

To pick a random example, how does the Flask Rogue fight off a Young Black Dragon attacking an airship?

Alchemist's fire.

How about when you need to explore a sunken pirate ship and fight off giant octopi? Or since you think Vrocks are easy, how would you fight an Erinye in a large open space?

You'll note that the build is perfectly capable of picking up a shortbow, it's just slightly less effective. The Rogue also gets Abuse Magic Device.

The problem is that your rogue has only one trick. It's a powerful trick when it works, but it's hardly on the level of classes that have a dozen tricks or can swap their build out on a daily basis.

So having a trick just as powerful as any of the Wizard's tricks is less powerful because the Wizard could have done something else? Sorry, no. You only ever do one thing in any given day. If that thing is hardcore enough to kill whatever fools separate you from your goal, you are of an appropriate power level. If it is not, you aren't. A sane class ranking would look at three things: Can your class play with full casters? How hard is it to build your class? How hard is it to play your class? For example, a Fighter can't play with full casters, is very complex to build (there are thousands of feats), and is very simple to play (because you hit things with your sword). A Sorcerer can play with full casters, is very complex to build, and is fairly simple to play.

P.S. You did remember to account for the Vrock's Mirror Images and energy resistance, right?

Pretty sure that mirror image doesn't do anything because flasks are AoE, but yes the energy resistance makes the Vrock a harder fight. That's why your win is DPS dependent. Also why I put the Vrock as slightly disfavored.

Fairly sure the wizard can cover the Beguiler job. And spell list. The reverse is not true.

I dunno, seems like the Beguiler does a better job as a Rainbow Servant than a Wizard. I also notice you've dropped the Dread Necromancer.

The tier systems, as far as I know, measures versatility with capacity to break the game as an additional qualifier to get into the two top tiers. I really don't see how anyone can advance an argument that the Beguiler can keep up with the Wizards versatility.

Yes it does, and I'm saying those things are stupid criteria. Versatility is a much smaller marginal difference than power is, and everyone can break the game. Seriously, a candle of invocation exists and has a price in gold - the game is already broken if you can use your wealth by level to buy items from the DMG regardless of what your class happens to be.

Grim Reader

2015-05-20, 06:29 AM

I dunno, seems like the Beguiler does a better job as a Rainbow Servant than a Wizard. I also notice you've dropped the Dread Necromancer.

I don't believe I have ever mentioned Dread Necromancer? Are they more versatile than the Wizard? Can the Wizard cover the Dread Necromacers area? Are there areas the Wizard can cover that the Necromancer can't?

Yes it does, and I'm saying those things are stupid criteria. Versatility is a much smaller marginal difference than power is, and everyone can break the game. Seriously, a candle of invocation exists and has a price in gold - the game is already broken if you can use your wealth by level to buy items from the DMG regardless of what your class happens to be.

Its about playing the game. The more situations there are where your character can't contribute, the less fun you are going to have. That is why versatility is the yardstick, I believe. As for the candle, equipment are explicitly excluded form the tier system, because it compares classes, and equipment zeroes out. You are comparing classes, not equipment design.

Brova

2015-05-20, 07:25 AM

I don't believe I have ever mentioned Dread Necromancer? Are they more versatile than the Wizard? Can the Wizard cover the Dread Necromacers area? Are there areas the Wizard can cover that the Necromancer can't?

I was the one who brought it up, I thought you had responded about it. Dread Necromancers get better minions that Wizards and desecrate, putting them ahead on the undead armies front.

Its about playing the game. The more situations there are where your character can't contribute, the less fun you are going to have. That is why versatility is the yardstick, I believe.

You've yet to present a problem a competently played Beguiler or Halfing Hurler can't solve. And again, versatility is meaningless in actual play. You will only ever solve any given encounter one way. When you dominate the evil baron, it doesn't matter if you could have finger of death'd him, or used planar binding to get some demons to kill him, or whatever. What you actually did was dominate him.

As for the candle, equipment are explicitly excluded form the tier system, because it compares classes, and equipment zeroes out. You are comparing classes, not equipment design.

Ah, but there are classes (such as the Rogue) that have Abuse Magic Device as a class skill. Those classes are created and "balanced" with the assumption that they will use magic items. Beyond that, the real deal with the candle is just getting gate, and in turn getting wish. Should Healer and Truenamer be tier one because they get gate and can use it to wish for items of arbitrary power?

Elderand

2015-05-20, 07:32 AM

You've yet to present a problem a competently played Beguiler or Halfing Hurler can't solve. And again, versatility is meaningless in actual play. You will only ever solve any given encounter one way. When you dominate the evil baron, it doesn't matter if you could have finger of death'd him, or used planar binding to get some demons to kill him, or whatever. What you actually did was dominate him.

And then one day you face an enemy with mind blank and true seeing and your beguiler is shut down entirely. Meanwhile a wizard will just shrug and cast something else that will work.

THAT is why versatility matter, when you have one trick and that trick get shut down you're useless.

sleepyphoenixx

2015-05-20, 07:34 AM

So having a trick just as powerful as any of the Wizard's tricks is less powerful because the Wizard could have done something else? Sorry, no. You only ever do one thing in any given day. If that thing is hardcore enough to kill whatever fools separate you from your goal, you are of an appropriate power level. If it is not, you aren't.

That's exactly the point of the tier system. Having one powerful trick is nice, but when that trick doesn't work/is countered you're hosed.
A powerful character doesn't "only ever do one thing in any given day". They're capable of doing several things and possess some way to either prepare for several things simultaneously or switch on the fly.

I dunno, seems like the Beguiler does a better job as a Rainbow Servant than a Wizard. I also notice you've dropped the Dread Necromancer.

Using Rainbow Servant as a reason for Beguiler/Dread Necromancer power is misleading. Even with the most generous early entry you're going to spend more than half your characters life without those cleric spells (ECL 11). Far more likely you're going to spend 3/4 of your build without them (ECL 15). Most campaigns don't start at level 20.

Even disregarding that none of the power actually comes from the Beguiler/DN. It's all the cleric list. Without that their lists are severely limited, and that is the basis on which relative character power is judged.

atemu1234

2015-05-20, 07:37 AM

Elderand

2015-05-20, 07:38 AM

Even disregarding that none of the power actually comes from the Beguiler/DN. It's all the cleric list. Without that their lists are severely limited, and that is the basis on which relative character power is judged.

That's not quite true, it's not entirely the cleric list that makes it a very interesting possibility, it's the interaction between the way beguiler/dread necro cast spontaneously and the fact they know their whole spell list. Getting the cleric spells is good, getting them all spontaneously is fantastic.

Grim Reader

2015-05-20, 07:38 AM

I was the one who brought it up, I thought you had responded about it. Dread Necromancers get better minions that Wizards and desecrate, putting them ahead on the undead armies front.

While they may or may not be better than the Wizards in one area, minionmancy, that does not mean that they are more versatile if Wizards outperform them in a number of other areas.

You've yet to present a problem a competently played Beguiler or Halfing Hurler can't solve. And again, versatility is meaningless in actual play. You will only ever solve any given encounter one way. When you dominate the evil baron, it doesn't matter if you could have finger of death'd him, or used planar binding to get some demons to kill him, or whatever. What you actually did was dominate him.

I don't think you fully understand what "versatility" implies.

Ah, but there are classes (such as the Rogue) that have Abuse Magic Device as a class skill. Those classes are created and "balanced" with the assumption that they will use magic items. Beyond that, the real deal with the candle is just getting gate, and in turn getting wish. Should Healer and Truenamer be tier one because they get gate and can use it to wish for items of arbitrary power?

I believe its actually noted that when they do get gate they rocket into tier 2 -at that level. But for most of their career, they're not. And it is a comparison of classes, not equipment.

Grim Reader

2015-05-20, 07:46 AM

That's not quite true, it's not entirely the cleric list that makes it a very interesting possibility, it's the interaction between the way beguiler/dread necro cast spontaneously and the fact they know their whole spell list. Getting the cleric spells is good, getting them all spontaneously is fantastic.

This is true, but...

Basically, just because a lot of things can go Ur-Priest Mystic Theurge...

There are a lot of builds that can hit a higher tier than the base class. This does not raise the tier of the base class.

Elderand

2015-05-20, 07:49 AM

There are a lot of builds that can hit a higher tier than the base class. This does not raise the tier of the base class.

Oh absolutly, I wasn't arguing that it did. Just that saying that all the power come from the cleric list is just not true. Rainbow servant is at it's best with those two classes. In this case it's very much a thing that is better than the sums of it's parts.

Brova

2015-05-20, 08:00 AM

And then one day you face an enemy with mind blank and true seeing and your beguiler is shut down entirely. Meanwhile a wizard will just shrug and cast something else that will work.

THAT is why versatility matter, when you have one trick and that trick get shut down you're useless.

Wait, but my trick includes dominate and buffs. And being a Rainbow Servant. You remember all those enemies who didn't have true seeing and mindblank? I have them as pokemon.

Using Rainbow Servant as a reason for Beguiler/Dread Necromancer power is misleading. Even with the most generous early entry you're going to spend more than half your characters life without those cleric spells (ECL 11). Far more likely you're going to spend 3/4 of your build without them (ECL 15). Most campaigns don't start at level 20.

That's fair. Rainbow Servant does take a while to come online. But during that time you're casting color spray and sleep and 1st, glitterdust and hypnotic pattern and 4th, hold person and slow at 6th, solid fog and charm monster at 8th, dominate person and feeblemind at 10th. And don't forget that you've got charm person from level one and were making the DC 20 check to turn charmed humanoids into minions by level 2 (5 ranks + 2 Bluff synergy + 2 Sense Motive synergy + 1 stat).

And that is with one book + core. The only optimization that build does is "cast good spells instead of bad spells." Maybe not better than a Wizard, but a Factotum? Hell yah. A Sorcerer? Also yes. A Favored Soul? Yep. Now your spells do dry up a little after 5th level, but you could already be a full Rainbow Servant by then, and you're taking Arcane Disciple as a feat or using know stones or any of the other ways to expand your spells known.

Even disregarding that none of the power actually comes from the Beguiler/DN. It's all the cleric list. Without that their lists are severely limited, and that is the basis on which relative character power is judged.

Actually, the whole "cast any spell on your spell list" is why Dread Necromancers and Beguilers make such good Rainbow Servants. They actually end up as better Clerics than the Cleric because instead of picking new spells every day, they pick new ones every round.

While they may or may not be better than the Wizards in one area, minionmancy, that does not mean that they are more versatile if Wizards outperform them in a number of other areas.

I don't think you fully understand what "versatility" implies.

I don't think you understand how power levels work. I doesn't matter if you can solve a problem two ways if you have a trick that can solve that problem. You can't just say "versatility" and leave it at that. You need to demonstrate how the Dread Necromancer and Beguiler can't solve problems with save or dies, the most forgiving casting mechanic in the game, and an army of minions.

And it is a comparison of classes, not equipment.

So equipment includes the Wizard's class feature of having a spellbook (and scribing new spells, without that he's just a Beguiler), but not the Rogue's class feature of Abuse Magic Device?

Elderand

2015-05-20, 08:23 AM

Wait, but my trick includes dominate and buffs. And being a Rainbow Servant. You remember all those enemies who didn't have true seeing and mindblank? I have them as pokemon.

Rainbow servant is not part of your tricks. It doesn't factor into tier consideration just like the tier system doesn't factor in incantatrix for wizard.
Also dominate, only going to work on humanoid until you get 9th level spells at which point damn near everything is going to be immune. It's cute but vastly inferior to even a simple summon monster spell.

And that is with one book + core. The only optimization that build does is "cast good spells instead of bad spells." Maybe not better than a Wizard, but a Factotum? Hell yah. A Sorcerer? Also yes. A Favored Soul? Yep. Now your spells do dry up a little after 5th level, but you could already be a full Rainbow Servant by then, and you're taking Arcane Disciple as a feat or using know stones or any of the other ways to expand your spells known.

Comparing specific builds to base classes is disingenuous, which is why the tier system doesn't do that. No one is arguing a beguiler/rainbow servant doesn't shoot up to tier 1 but beguiler on his own isn't getting there.

Also better than a sorcerer ? I don't think so, there is no reason why a sorcerer couldn't get any and all those spells you cited.

So equipment includes the Wizard's class feature of having a spellbook (and scribing new spells, without that he's just a Beguiler), but not the Rogue's class feature of Abuse Magic Device?

Because spellbooks are specific to wizards, UMD is not specific to rogues, anyone can invest in it. And again, the tier system is not taking equipement into account, just what the classes by themselves are capable off.

You can keep railling and ranting all you want against the result of the tier system but none of your conclusion are valid as long as you keep using different parameters.

Grim Reader

2015-05-20, 08:31 AM

Wait, but my trick includes dominate and buffs. And being a Rainbow Servant. You remember all those enemies who didn't have true seeing and mindblank? I have them as pokemon.

Your bag of tricks in relation to the tier system does not include being a Rainbow Servant. We just covered this above. You can say that a specific build, in this case Beguiler/Rainbow servant is at a high tier, well above the Beguiler, but that does not actually change the tier of the Beguiler. If it did, every class would be ranked by its highest build, sometimes including only one level of the class.

They are ranked by their own class. Sometimes being easy to optimize is referred to as having a "high ceiling" while being easy to screw up is having a "low floor".

As for dominate and buffs, the wizard has them too. So no advantage. The Wizards versatility advantage in this case includes being able to do the Beguilers song and dance, his own song and dance, the Dread Necros song and dance and the performance routine of their slightly inbred cousin the Warmage.

And that is with one book + core. The only optimization that build does is "cast good spells instead of bad spells." Maybe not better than a Wizard, but a Factotum? Hell yah. A Sorcerer? Also yes. Yep. Now your spells do dry up a little after 5th level, but you could already be a full Rainbow Servant by then, and you're taking Arcane Disciple as a feat or using know stones or any of the other ways to expand your spells known.

While the difference between a Sorcerer and a Beguiler is considerably less than the difference between a Sorcerer and a Warmage, I believe this thread (http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1149981) is relevant.

I don't think you understand how power levels work. I doesn't matter if you can solve a problem two ways if you have a trick that can solve that problem. You can't just say "versatility" and leave it at that. You need to demonstrate how the Dread Necromancer and Beguiler can't solve problems with save or dies, the most forgiving casting mechanic in the game, and an army of minions.

During an adventuring career, you will face as host of different problems, opponents, settings and environments. "versatility" is how many of them you have answers for, or can remain relevant in. Not who has the greatest number of different answers to a single problem. That is what I mean by you don't seem to understand versatility.

So equipment includes the Wizard's class feature of having a spellbook (and scribing new spells, without that he's just a Beguiler), but not the Rogue's class feature of Abuse Magic Device?

Correct. The spellbook is a class feature. Also, normal mundane equipment is also assumed, such as a melee class having acress to armor and weaponry.

mashlagoo1982

2015-05-20, 08:33 AM

Even just looking at the truenamer row, I can instantly tell that parts of that are blatantly untrue (the truenamer's ranged damage output, especially at low levels, is one of its key selling points, and it's rated a 4). We're also wondering why it's listed as having "absolutely nothing to support" controlling creatures when there are utterances that do that, or why the class which gets +LOLHUEG to its knowledge checks and has at-will scrying provided he bothers using the relatively easy truename research rules isn't listed as a 1 on sage, while the factotum which basically does the same thing but worse is, for example.

I think Person_Man actually gave a reason for his harsh scoring of Truenamer somewhere in the thread. I have never looked into the class myself, but my basic understanding was he took a stricter interpretation of their abilities. I think it maybe had something to do with their powers being poorly written and much of their abilities is left open for DM interpretation. Otherwise the class would have all 1's (or something like that).

My understanding is that the remainder of the table is fairly accurate and could be used in this situation.

Ignoring Truename, just search out the highest scored classes. Those should be terrible.

Rubik

2015-05-20, 08:34 AM

Also dominate, only going to work on humanoid until you get 9th 1st level spells at which point damn near everything is going to be immune.Don't forget that Protection From [Alignment] is a thing.

Jormengand

2015-05-20, 09:11 AM

I think Person_Man actually gave a reason for his harsh scoring of Truenamer somewhere in the thread. I have never looked into the class myself, but my basic understanding was he took a stricter interpretation of their abilities. I think it maybe had something to do with their powers being poorly written and much of their abilities is left open for DM interpretation. Otherwise the class would have all 1's (or something like that).

If their abilities were better worded, their power would go down because they wouldn't be able to un-dispel spells from another plane of existence.

Plus, the class certainly shouldn't have all 1s either, just a fair few 1s.

Should Healer and Truenamer be tier one because they get gate and can use it to wish for items of arbitrary power?

No, because the tier system mainly looks at levels 6-16 where actual play tends to take place.

Flickerdart

2015-05-20, 09:22 AM

A Wizard has a lower floor than a Warblade? Sorry, you've lost me there and for the rest of your message :).
The worst possible Warblade has just picked a bunch of Strikes that deal +X damage, and even if he forgets to use Strikes and Stances he still has a d12 HD and full BAB.

The worst possible Wizard has prepared only useless spells (or no spells at all thanks to his Intelligence score of 9, for especially terrible Wizards) and is essentially a commoner with a pet rat.

Wizards are only powerful when you know how to use them. So are Clerics. So are Artificers. The vast majority of the high tier classes won't hold your hand to unlimited power.

mashlagoo1982

2015-05-20, 09:43 AM

If their abilities were better worded, their power would go down because they wouldn't be able to un-dispel spells from another plane of existence.

Plus, the class certainly shouldn't have all 1s either, just a fair few 1s.

No, because the tier system mainly looks at levels 6-16 where actual play tends to take place.

I don't know anything about Factotums or Truenamers. Perhaps someone else can address why Truenamers only received a 2 for Sage (which is still a great score).

Would you say that a Truenamer is better then the following classes for Sage?

Archivist
Artificer
Cleric
Savant
Sha'ir
Wizard

This is all I could find for the scoring of Truenamers that Person_Man posted in that thread.

"For the Truenamer, I went out of my way to re-read the Tome of Magic reading up , on it and all the comments. But I ended up rating them a bit lower then Kyeudo in a few categories. I personally don't believe that a class is efficient if it requires an Item Familiar and membership in a campaign specific organization in order to function. Having said that, like many other classes I feel as if you could bump them up one rating in pretty much any Niche through optimization."

"•Truenamer is staying at 3 (or 4 at things it can't do at all), by virtue of the fact that your Truespeak Skill checks are often going to fail against enemies unless you've invested multiple non-class resources from semi-obscure places in order to get them to work. The exceptions are Curiosity, Heal, and Sage, which you're using on yourself or allies, which is slightly easier."

Back on topic of OP, I pulled the classes that received a score of 55 or higher (ignoring Truenamer).
These should be some of the most terrible classes. Keep in mind, a listed class may have a niche they are great at.
NPC classes are included.

Adept
Aristocrat
Barbarian
Battle Dancer
Commoner
Dragon Shaman
Expert
Fighter
Lurk
Magewright
Monk
Noble
Samurai (Oriential Adventures)
Samurai (Complete Warrior)
Scout
Sohei
Soulknife
Swashbuckler
Warmage
Warrior

Flickerdart

2015-05-20, 09:48 AM

Adept
Aristocrat
Barbarian
Battle Dancer
Commoner
Dragon Shaman
Expert
Fighter
Lurk
Magewright
Monk
Noble
Samurai (Oriential Adventures)
Samurai (Complete Warrior)
Scout
Sohei
Soulknife
Swashbuckler
Warmage
Warrior
I'd say that Scout and Barbarian don't really belong on that list - both are better than Hexblade for sure, not just in a niche but in general. Everything else looks about right.

mashlagoo1982

2015-05-20, 09:59 AM

I'd say that Scout and Barbarian don't really belong on that list - both are better than Hexblade for sure, not just in a niche but in general. Everything else looks about right.

Those are two of the classes I would also consider removing.

The Barbarian because they are only good at 2 or 3 things, but those things can take up a large portion of a game (dealing damage and taking damage) depending on how it is run.

The Scout is at 56 and has some rank 2s on their chart.

Story

2015-05-20, 10:02 AM

Alchemist's fire.

Too bad thrown weapons have a maximum range of 50ft while the Dragon's breath attack is 60ft.

Anyway, you might be able to do the dragon with a shortbow. It is only CR5 after all. But I notice you didn't respond at all to the other scenarios I mentioned (all from real games I can remember).

So having a trick just as powerful as any of the Wizard's tricks is less powerful because the Wizard could have done something else? Sorry, no. You only ever do one thing in any given day. If that thing is hardcore enough to kill whatever fools separate you from your goal, you are of an appropriate power level. If it is not, you aren't. A sane class ranking would look at three things: Can your class play with full casters? How hard is it to build your class? How hard is it to play your class? For example, a Fighter can't play with full casters, is very complex to build (there are thousands of feats), and is very simple to play (because you hit things with your sword). A Sorcerer can play with full casters, is very complex to build, and is fairly simple to play.

Only one thing per day? What do you do, fight one encounter and then rest every time? I don't know about you but most people do a different thing every round and having multiple tricks is important. Again, see the list of scenarios above. And that doesn't even include the ones like "travel 500 miles in a week" that just make mundanes cry.

Your rogue can't play with casters unless the casters babysit it with buffs and utility. I mean in a real game, they'd probably sit back and let the mundanes do their thing but it's not at all an equal playing field. And by that standard, a Fighter can play with casters just as well.

Pretty sure that mirror image doesn't do anything because flasks are AoE, but yes the energy resistance makes the Vrock a harder fight. That's why your win is DPS dependent. Also why I put the Vrock as slightly disfavored.

The flasks are a touch attack. If you miss, you're only doing 1 damage, which means 0 damage due to resistance. And that's assuming they're not in the air in the first place.

I dunno, seems like the Beguiler does a better job as a Rainbow Servant than a Wizard. I also notice you've dropped the Dread Necromancer.

A) the tier system doesn't measure PRCs, B) Rainbow Servant only comes online at level 16 C) As long as you're using a cheesy PRC like that, the Wizard might as well go Incantrix.

Yes it does, and I'm saying those things are stupid criteria. Versatility is a much smaller marginal difference than power is, and everyone can break the game.

I'm having trouble telling what you're even trying to argue here. In theory everyone can become Punpun, but obviously that's not something that's normally under consideration. In a practical game, versatility and PO power are key. I mean unless you fight the same encounter over and over again, in which case I guess versatility doesn't matter? I've never seen a game like that though.

Flickerdart

2015-05-20, 10:06 AM

The Barbarian because they are only good at 2 or 3 things, but those things can take up a large portion of a game (dealing damage and taking damage) depending on how it is run.
Barbarians can actually be quite decent at a bunch of things - tripping, trapfinding (trapkiller yeahhhh), stealth and scouting (spirit eagle and spirit fox), archery (ferocity or whirling frenzy), social encounters (Intimidate and friends, mostly). Not all at the same time, maybe, but they can be tailored for the game they're in.

Jormengand

2015-05-20, 10:26 AM

Would you say that a Truenamer is better then the following classes for Sage?

Archivist
Artificer
Cleric
Savant
Sha'ir
Wizard

Don't know, I would imagine so, usually, don't know, think so, yes unless the wizard is willing to burn XP on it.

This is all I could find for the scoring of Truenamers that Person_Man posted in that thread.

"For the Truenamer, I went out of my way to re-read the Tome of Magic reading up , on it and all the comments. But I ended up rating them a bit lower then Kyeudo in a few categories. I personally don't believe that a class is efficient if it requires an Item Familiar and membership in a campaign specific organization in order to function. Having said that, like many other classes I feel as if you could bump them up one rating in pretty much any Niche through optimization."

I have played many truenamers, often in games where Item Familiar was flat-out banned, and you know what?

I have never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever, ever had a truenamer of mine join the Paragnostic Assembly. Ever.

"•Truenamer is staying at 3 (or 4 at things it can't do at all), by virtue of the fact that your Truespeak Skill checks are often going to fail against enemies unless you've invested multiple non-class resources from semi-obscure places in order to get them to work.

Such as core and the ToM, which is where the truenamer freaking comes from.

The exceptions are Curiosity, Heal, and Sage, which you're using on yourself or allies, which is slightly easier."

Sometimes easier, not that it matters because by thirdish level you can usually be passing your truespeak check against most enemies on a zero.

Adept

I'd take Adept over, say, Paladin any day.

Gnaeus

2015-05-20, 10:28 AM

That's exactly the point of the tier system. Having one powerful trick is nice, but when that trick doesn't work/is countered you're hosed.
A powerful character doesn't "only ever do one thing in any given day". They're capable of doing several things and possess some way to either prepare for several things simultaneously or switch on the fly.

Using Rainbow Servant as a reason for Beguiler/Dread Necromancer power is misleading. Even with the most generous early entry you're going to spend more than half your characters life without those cleric spells (ECL 11). Far more likely you're going to spend 3/4 of your build without them (ECL 15). Most campaigns don't start at level 20.

We don't have to wander into Rainbow Servant to make the argument that DN/Beguiler are equivalent in power to sorc. To be sure, a Rainbow Servant with those classes as a base is high T1. But...

Arcane Devotee is a simple feat which adds entire cleric domains worth of spells.
A huge variety of PRCs are immensely helpful to the classes with that casting mechanic. Don't like Rainbow Servant? Shadowcraft Gnomes are awesome. Don't like Shadowcraft Gnomes? Sandshaper adds like 40 buff and attack spells to your list.
A Beguiler or DN can both use UMD. So can a rogue, fine. But unlike a rogue or factotum, a Beguiler or DN can use UMD on a runestaff to add additional spells to their list. Its a class skill for Beguilers, and DNs are charisma based, so they can do it pretty darn well.

At all but the highest levels of optimization, a DN or Beguiler is more versatile than a sorcerer. If sorcerer is tier 2, so are they. Now, the simple fact is that a one tier difference doesn't mean much, so its kind of a wash. But:

A low op sorcerer has bad spells known. He may focus on a single area, like invocation or necromancy. Beguilers and DNs have a very high optimization floor, because they have 1. better hp. 2. better armor. 3. a preset and very decent spell list. At low levels, it is pretty hard for a sorc to equal beguiler casting, even with decent opti-fu. 4 actual class abilities other than casting.

A mid op sorcerer has a well rounded spell list that can deal with any kind of enemy. A mid op DN or Beguiler has expanded their spell list with items, feats, or PRCs and so have more spells known, with a similar range of option types.

A high op sorcerer can use junk like dragonwrought kobold for extra levels. I can't beat that. I've never seen a table that would allow it, but sure, its a thing, and it isn't a thing a beguiler can match.

Flickerdart

2015-05-20, 10:33 AM

We don't have to wander into Rainbow Servant to make the argument that DN/Beguiler are equivalent in power to sorc. To be sure, a Rainbow Servant with those classes as a base is high T1. But...

Arcane Devotee is a simple feat which adds entire cleric domains worth of spells.
A huge variety of PRCs are immensely helpful to the classes with that casting mechanic. Don't like Rainbow Servant? Shadowcraft Gnomes are awesome. Don't like Shadowcraft Gnomes? Sandshaper adds like 40 buff and attack spells to your list.
A Beguiler or DN can both use UMD. So can a rogue, fine. But unlike a rogue or factotum, a Beguiler or DN can use UMD on a runestaff to add additional spells to their list. Its a class skill for Beguilers, and DNs are charisma based, so they can do it pretty darn well.

At all but the highest levels of optimization, a DN or Beguiler is more versatile than a sorcerer. If sorcerer is tier 2, so are they. Now, the simple fact is that a one tier difference doesn't mean much, so its kind of a wash. But:

A low op sorcerer has bad spells known. He may focus on a single area, like invocation or necromancy. Beguilers and DNs have a very high optimization floor, because they have 1. better hp. 2. better armor. 3. a preset and very decent spell list. At low levels, it is pretty hard for a sorc to equal beguiler casting, even with decent opti-fu. 4 actual class abilities other than casting.

A mid op sorcerer has a well rounded spell list that can deal with any kind of enemy. A mid op DN or Beguiler has expanded their spell list with items, feats, or PRCs and so have more spells known, with a similar range of option types.

A high op sorcerer can use junk like dragonwrought kobold for extra levels. I can't beat that. I've never seen a table that would allow it, but sure, its a thing, and it isn't a thing a beguiler can match.
Beguilers trade power for flavor. I mean, they don't even have a familiar.

sleepyphoenixx

2015-05-20, 10:36 AM

We don't have to wander into Rainbow Servant to make the argument that DN/Beguiler are equivalent in power to sorc. To be sure, a Rainbow Servant with those classes as a base is high T1. But...

That's all very nice. I even agree.

But none of that matters for the tier system. It compares base classes and their class features. Not PrCs or items.
And in that comparison the Sorcerer has access to the best list in the game while the Beguiler has a pretty limited list, which is why one is T2 and the other is T3.

Not to mention that "if i spent x resources the Beguiler is as good as a Sorcerer without any of those resources" kind of misses the point.
The sorcerer has all those resources (feats, class levels, WBL) too, and it doesn't need to spend them on expanding its list because it already has access to the best list.

You don't build a Sorcerer like a Wizard, or to emulate a Wizard. That's when you play a Wizard. Playing catch up like that is a losing proposition from the start.
You build a Sorcerer to emphasize its strengths, the things it does better than other casters. The same obviously applies to the other classes.

Brova

2015-05-20, 10:38 AM

Y'all need to present problems that the Beguiler can't solve before you can claim "versatility" as an advantage. The reason versatility matters is because there are situations in which you can't contribute. That's barely true of the straight out of the book Beguiler, and not true at all if he's allowed gear, feats, or prestige classes.

Also dominate, only going to work on humanoid until you get 9th level spells at which point damn near everything is going to be immune. It's cute but vastly inferior to even a simple summon monster spell.

It's funny, because the real shot is charm person and charm monster which both come online before dominate. Also worth noting that at CR 8 (when you get charm monster), there are all of seven monsters in the MM that are immune, which clocks in at less than half of the options at that level. There are a couple more you might have trouble with (i.e. animals), but that's a long shot from "near everything". Even at CR 18 when you get dominate monster, only the Nightcrawler is naturally immune. The Dragons at that CR are casting 4th level spells, which means relying on protection from evil to be immune.

Comparing specific builds to base classes is disingenuous, which is why the tier system doesn't do that. No one is arguing a beguiler/rainbow servant doesn't shoot up to tier 1 but beguiler on his own isn't getting there.

Specific builds? I mean, yes, I mentioned Rainbow Servant, but I also said:

But during that time you're casting color spray and sleep and 1st, glitterdust and hypnotic pattern and 4th, hold person and slow at 6th, solid fog and charm monster at 8th, dominate person and feeblemindat 10th. And don't forget that you've got charm person from level one and were making the DC 20 check to turn charmed humanoids into minions by level 2 (5 ranks + 2 Bluff synergy + 2 Sense Motive synergy + 1 stat).

That's a Beguiler that starts building a stable of minions from level two, with no selections other than skills. That build doesn't even have a race, or feats.

Also better than a sorcerer ? I don't think so, there is no reason why a sorcerer couldn't get any and all those spells you cited.

Actually, there is. The Sorcerer only ever gets four spells known, and gets one when he gets a new level of spells. That puts him solidly behind the Beguiler in the all important "versatility".

Because spellbooks are specific to wizards, UMD is not specific to rogues, anyone can invest in it. And again, the tier system is not taking equipement into account, just what the classes by themselves are capable off.

So Wizards can buy scrolls to use with their spellbooks (remember, the alternative is that they only get two spells a level), but Rogues can't buy those same scrolls to use with their UMD?

Too bad thrown weapons have a maximum range of 50ft while the Dragon's breath attack is 60ft.

You mean the breath weapon that allows a Rogue to make a reflex save for half none?

But I notice you didn't respond at all to the other scenarios I mentioned (all from real games I can remember).

Sorry, those must have gotten lost. Remind me what you asked about?

Only one thing per day? What do you do, fight one encounter and then rest every time? I don't know about you but most people do a different thing every round and having multiple tricks is important. Again, see the list of scenarios above. And that doesn't even include the ones like "travel 500 miles in a week" that just make mundanes cry.

"One trick per day" in this context means one set of spells. Regardless of the Wizards ability to prepare a different set of spells, in any actual scenario he has prepared only one set of spells. It's possible that those spells will contain options the Beguiler's don't, but it's also possible those spells won't contain enough of the spells the Beguiler has.

Your rogue can't play with casters unless the casters babysit it with buffs and utility. I mean in a real game, they'd probably sit back and let the mundanes do their thing but it's not at all an equal playing field. And by that standard, a Fighter can play with casters just as well.

Depends what you mean. In practical optimization (i.e. no planar binding, charm, or polymorph shenanigans) a Flask Rogue absolutely keeps up. In theoretical optimization, casters pull ahead for a while - shapechange, Incantatrix, or demon armies all beat out the Rogue - but the endgame of TO play is wish abuse, and a Rogue uses a Candle just fine.

The flasks are a touch attack. If you miss, you're only doing 1 damage, which means 0 damage due to resistance. And that's assuming they're not in the air in the first place.

Someone forgot sneak attack.

Elderand

2015-05-20, 10:38 AM

stuff

Annnnnnd you make the exact same mistake as the other guy did.

Your argument for why beguiler and dread necromancer are as good as sorcerer is "they go well with PRC and feats" which is specificly something the tier system doesn't look at.

It doesn't matter how good you can make a beguiler or dread necro with feats and prc. Whitout it a beguiler is still stuck with mostly illusions and enchantments and dread necro with inferior minionmancy and necromancy spells.

Flickerdart

2015-05-20, 10:46 AM

Your argument for why beguiler and dread necromancer are as good as sorcerer is "they go well with PRC and feats" which is specificly something the tier system doesn't look at.
Is the system not concerned with options that are unique or uniquely effective for a class? The fixed-list casters derive unique benefits from a few options (namely, anything that expands your list) that no other class can do.

Deadline

2015-05-20, 10:48 AM

Someone forgot sneak attack.

I thought Precision Damage only applied on a hit, so it wouldn't apply to splash damage from a miss? You'd need a direct hit that got past Mirror Image to trigger your sneak attack damage. Your splash damage would be useless against a Vrock.

mashlagoo1982

2015-05-20, 10:48 AM

Don't know, I would imagine so, usually, don't know, think so, yes unless the wizard is willing to burn XP on it.

etc...

Trying not to sound like a jerk, but the argument means nothing to me.

I know nothing about Truenamer and I had no hand in the making of the original niche list.
It just seemed like a useful tool for this request.

Edit: I just noticed... it appears the ranking may not have been completed. Person_Man was reviewing the ranking by niche (A-Z). Healing was to be reviewed next, but was never done on the board.

Taking out the suggested classes of both you and Flickerdart, the remaining terrible classes would be as follows.

Aristocrat
Battle Dancer
Commoner
Dragon Shaman
Expert
Fighter
Lurk
Magewright
Monk
Noble
Samurai (Oriential Adventures)
Samurai (Complete Warrior)
Sohei
Soulknife
Swashbuckler
Warmage
Warrior

Elderand

2015-05-20, 10:57 AM

It's funny, because the real shot is charm person and charm monster which both come online before dominate. Also worth noting that at CR 8 (when you get charm monster), there are all of seven monsters in the MM that are immune, which clocks in at less than half of the options at that level. There are a couple more you might have trouble with (i.e. animals), but that's a long shot from "near everything". Even at CR 18 when you get dominate monster, only the Nightcrawler is naturally immune. The Dragons at that CR are casting 4th level spells, which means relying on protection from evil to be immune.

Moving the goalpost now are we ? You specificly said one of your big trick was dominate, funny how that turn into "really it's charm person" as soon as it's shown that dominate isn't all that.

Also to add to the list of things that are immune: ooze, undeads, constructs, anything with enough casting level to get mindblank.

And you don't only ever face encounters of CR equal to your level, in fact most big bads tends to be higher in CR than your level.

That's a Beguiler that starts building a stable of minions from level two, with no selections other than skills. That build doesn't even have a race, or feats.
Except that's just not true because charm person, again, won't work on most things because most things aren't humanoid and it doesn't give you minions at all given that the text for charm person specificly says that you do not control their actions and they never obey suicidal or obviously harmful orders. Also, language dependant.

Actually, there is. The Sorcerer only ever gets four spells known, and gets one when he gets a new level of spells. That puts him solidly behind the Beguiler in the all important "versatility".

No, it doesn't because the beguiler spell list is full of redundancies, you could cut it in half and not really loose any options. And sorcerer get more spells than you're saying, so either you're wrong or didn't explain clearly because the way you say it a sorcerer would only get 12. They get 34 not counting cantrips.

So Wizards can buy scrolls to use with their spellbooks (remember, the alternative is that they only get two spells a level), but Rogues can't buy those same scrolls to use with their UMD?

Heh, wizards don't even need to buy anything to end up with every single spells from their list. And even whitout buying any scrolls or finding any new spells a wizard end up with a minimum of 41 spells + cantrips. More likely 44 because I don't think many wizard start with less than 16 INT.

ComaVision

2015-05-20, 11:01 AM

@Brova

You don't get sneak attack damage from the splash of a flask. The primary target will take sneak attack damage, so if you attack an image when a Vrock is using mirror image you do 0 damage to the Vrock.

Elderand

2015-05-20, 11:01 AM

Is the system not concerned with options that are unique or uniquely effective for a class? The fixed-list casters derive unique benefits from a few options (namely, anything that expands your list) that no other class can do.

It's my understanding that it doesn't concern itself with such things.

Which is why the tier system is little more than a very rough guideline. There's too many factors that can end up making or breaking a character for it to be anything more than that.

Gnaeus

2015-05-20, 11:05 AM

Annnnnnd you make the exact same mistake as the other guy did.

Aannnnndd the other guy is still right and you are still wrong.

Your argument for why beguiler and dread necromancer are as good as sorcerer is "they go well with PRC and feats" which is specificly something the tier system doesn't look at.

A. That is not true. Of course you can look at feats when evaluating a class. PRCs are not strictly a part of the tier system. But the ability of a base class to utilize them is still something to consider. Like a wildshape ranger would be tier 3 without the ability to take PRCs or feats.
B. Even were that true, who cares? The tier system is a good rough guide to power levels. If the sorcerer is better under a system that does not include PRCs or feats, but you are in a game that allows PRCs and feats, Beguiler/DN is still better in play. Are we talking about arbitrary rankings, or games?

It doesn't matter how good you can make a beguiler or dread necro with feats and prc. Whitout it a beguiler is still stuck with mostly illusions and enchantments and dread necro with inferior minionmancy and necromancy spells.

Without feats a Sorcerer 8 has 11 spells known. A beguiler has more than 60. Those include the following spells:
L1 Mage Armor, Obscuring Mist, Sleep, Color Spray, Whelm, Disguise Self, Silent Image, Expeditious Retreat(Sorc knows 5 level 1s)
L2 Fog Cloud, Mirror Image, Glitterdust, Blur, Silence, Knock, Spider Climb, Invisibility (Sorc knows 3 level 2s)
L3 Haste, Slow, Dispel Magic, Arcane Sight, Clairvoyance, Displacement, (Sorc knows 2 level 3s.)
L4 Freedom of Movement, Solid Fog, Confusion, Greater Mirror Image, Greater Invisibility(Sorc knows 1 level 4)

Those are all spells that I would seriously consider getting on any caster. They include non illusion based battlefield control. Non illusion based buffs and debuffs. Divinations. Utility spells. And of course, the trademark illusions, enchantments, and will SoLs. If you can't contribute well in any encounter with just the list above, you're doing it wrong.

On top of that, beguiler has about 8 extra skill points. Trapfinding. Armor use. Better HP. By the optimization level at which a sorcerer can beat that basic chassis, the beguiler has long since expanded his options with one of multiple methods.

ComaVision

2015-05-20, 11:10 AM

If it makes anyone feel better, I do agree that DN and a Beguiler have a higher floor than nearly all T1 and T2 classes. :smallbiggrin:

Flickerdart

2015-05-20, 11:17 AM

If it makes anyone feel better, I do agree that DN and a Beguiler have a higher floor than nearly all T1 and T2 classes. :smallbiggrin:
Mm, I'm not so sure - or more accurately, I think that the fixed-list casters can have a floor so low that it's not meaningfully distinguishable from T1/T2 floors. Enchantment/Illusion and Necromancy are both schools that take a skilled player to use, even when your spells are pre-picked for you. A beguiler that doesn't know how to use figments and compulsions effectively (or a DM that doesn't allow figments and compulsions to function effectively) is going to be super crappy. To make the most of its list, including solid fog and the like, you need the same understanding you need to make a good wizard - that BFC/buffs/debuffs are better than pew pew lasers.

Gnaeus

2015-05-20, 11:23 AM

Mm, I'm not so sure - or more accurately, I think that the fixed-list casters can have a floor so low that it's not meaningfully distinguishable from T1/T2 floors. Enchantment/Illusion and Necromancy are both schools that take a skilled player to use, even when your spells are pre-picked for you. A beguiler that doesn't know how to use figments and compulsions effectively (or a DM that doesn't allow figments and compulsions to function effectively) is going to be super crappy. To make the most of its list, including solid fog and the like, you need the same understanding you need to make a good wizard - that BFC/buffs/debuffs are better than pew pew lasers.

Well, the beguiler who doesn't know how to be a good god caster can at least usually fall back on being a decent scout/party face/trapfinder. The lower the optimization level of the party, the more the base chassis benefits (armor, skill points, hp) will matter.

ComaVision

2015-05-20, 11:24 AM

Mm, I'm not so sure - or more accurately, I think that the fixed-list casters can have a floor so low that it's not meaningfully distinguishable from T1/T2 floors. Enchantment/Illusion and Necromancy are both schools that take a skilled player to use, even when your spells are pre-picked for you. A beguiler that doesn't know how to use figments and compulsions effectively (or a DM that doesn't allow figments and compulsions to function effectively) is going to be super crappy. To make the most of its list, including solid fog and the like, you need the same understanding you need to make a good wizard - that BFC/buffs/debuffs are better than pew pew lasers.

Agreed there. My interpretation of floor was just the character on paper. Like, if somebody that doesn't know the game well at all makes a Wizard and a Beguiler and I can choose one of those to play, I'll probably take the Beguiler because they couldn't have screwed it up as bad. (Assuming I can't buy more spells or otherwise alter the characters in this scenario.)

Curmudgeon

2015-05-20, 11:33 AM

@Brova

You don't get sneak attack damage from the splash of a flask.
This is correct. I've already stated my low opinion of the flask attack Rogue build. However, using a flask to attack the "creature" at the center of a Mirror Image cluster is quite effective, because you may well remove the spell effect entirely. The acid will affect 9 total squares for at least 1 point of damage, and Images don't get resistance to acid.
The primary target will take sneak attack damage, so if you attack an image when a Vrock is using mirror image you do 0 damage to the Vrock.
So you use a single splash weapon attack to remove the Vrock's Mirror Image, then your other attacks and your party mates' attacks can go at the creature itself. The effectiveness here is in the action economy: the flask Rogue's one trick (if within range) may be adequate with a single attack to counter a Vrock spamming one of its tricks repeatedly as a standard action each time.

I like Rogues quite a lot, but I've never made one dependent on splash weapons for all attacks. However, I do add acid flasks to the gear list specifically to respond to Mirror Image.

Brova

2015-05-20, 11:39 AM

Moving the goalpost now are we ? You specificly said one of your big trick was dominate, funny how that turn into "really it's charm person" as soon as it's shown that dominate isn't all that.

No. First, the goalpost is "prove Beguiler is a powerful class" not "prove dominate is a good spell". Second, in the same post where I made that claim I also talked about using charm person.

Also to add to the list of things that are immune: ooze, undeads, constructs, anything with enough casting level to get mindblank.

That's what illusions or charmed minions are for. Or buffing the party. Or in an actual game, Rainbow Servant, Sandshaper, or any other way to acquire spells known.

Except that's just not true because charm person, again, won't work on most things because most things aren't humanoid and it doesn't give you minions at all given that the text for charm person specificly says that you do not control their actions and they never obey suicidal or obviously harmful orders. Also, language dependant.

Most things at level 2 are humanoid. I mean, worst case charm the town guards. And yes, the text for charm person doesn't let you control their actions, but it does make them friendly. At that point making them helpful is a DC 20 Diplomacy check. Which a 2nd level Beguiler makes on a 10.

No, it doesn't because the beguiler spell list is full of redundancies, you could cut it in half and not really loose any options. And sorcerer get more spells than you're saying, so either you're wrong or didn't explain clearly because the way you say it a sorcerer would only get 12. They get 34 not counting cantrips.

For the Sorcerer, I was talking about per spell level, not in general. And of course, the Beguiler does actually have a big pile of options. For example, you've got charm person, sleep, and color spray at first level. Sure, they're all broadly "will based save or dies", but there's a lot of utility there. And you didn't even spend a feat on anything.

You don't get sneak attack damage from the splash of a flask. The primary target will take sneak attack damage, so if you attack an image when a Vrock is using mirror image you do 0 damage to the Vrock.

Where is the text that stops you from getting sneak attack on the splash? Also, your AoE is removing most/all of the images, so you only worry about that once.

Also, I think people are missing my point. I'm not necessarily saying that Beguiler belongs higher in the tier system, I'm saying that the tier system fails to effectively rank class power. To demonstrate, I propose the following:

Brova's Tier System

Brova's Tier System attempts to rank classes. As bonus feats are good, classes are ranked solely by how many bonus feats they have. This makes Fighter the best class. Obviously, accounting for class features, prestige classes, feats, or other aspects of play might change these rankings but that's not what the tier system is about.

Flickerdart

2015-05-20, 11:39 AM

Well, the beguiler who doesn't know how to be a good god caster can at least usually fall back on being a decent scout/party face/trapfinder. The lower the optimization level of the party, the more the base chassis benefits (armor, skill points, hp) will matter.
That's true - but they're not terribly pivotal roles in the first place, and someone sufficiently incompetent will fail at them anyway by putting in the ranks wrong. DNs are slightly better off here since they have a cleric-like chassis, so they can just pick up a scythe and be decent against goblins or something.

Agreed there. My interpretation of floor was just the character on paper. Like, if somebody that doesn't know the game well at all makes a Wizard and a Beguiler and I can choose one of those to play, I'll probably take the Beguiler because they couldn't have screwed it up as bad. (Assuming I can't buy more spells or otherwise alter the characters in this scenario.)
You can't really find an optimization floor without considering how the class will be played. After all, clerics all share a spell list, but a floor cleric will prepare garbage spells or use no spells at all.

Elderand

2015-05-20, 11:40 AM

Aannnnndd the other guy is still right and you are still wrong.

No, I'm not. Your problem is that you're contest the result of the tier system while using things it never took into account. You can't have a meaningful comparaison of your results and the results of the tier system if you haven't used the same methodology.

Now if you want to argue against the methodology of the tier system in the first place and therefore establish a different set of results entirely then that's fine, do that.

A. That is not true. Of course you can look at feats when evaluating a class. PRCs are not strictly a part of the tier system. But the ability of a base class to utilize them is still something to consider. Like a wildshape ranger would be tier 3 without the ability to take PRCs or feats.

You can, but that's not what the tier system did. The tier system assumed, as far as I know, as little outside ressources as possible.

B. Even were that true, who cares? The tier system is a good rough guide to power levels. If the sorcerer is better under a system that does not include PRCs or feats, but you are in a game that allows PRCs and feats, Beguiler/DN is still better in play. Are we talking about arbitrary rankings, or games?

Again, that's super misguiding. It's not so much a game that allow feats or PRCs as a game that will allow you to take a very small number of very specific feats or Prcs, at which point....what do you think the sorcerer si going to take skill focus for all his feats and throw bad sorcerers levels one after the other ? If you starts taking the best possible PRC for your beguiler then sorcerer does the same for his own class and in the end you end up with with classes that end up with Options: Yes, Feats: yes, can die ? : No. which is useless.

And also, who'se to say the specific book with the PRC you want to get or the feats you want to get are going to be allowed at any given table ?

That's why the tier system, no matter how arbitrary or rough a guideline it might be works. It assume so little that it is applicable everywhere baring houserules.

Without feats a Sorcerer 8 has 11 spells known.

Clearly you need to reread things because that's not at all what a sorcerer end up with. You're just....flat out wrong.

Curmudgeon

2015-05-20, 11:45 AM

Where is the text that stops you from getting sneak attack on the splash?
It's right in the ability description:
The rogue’s attack deals extra damage any time her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target. You target the creature at the center square. The splash (surrounding 8 squares) is not targeted.

Brova

2015-05-20, 11:53 AM

It's right in the ability description: You target the creature at the center square. The splash (surrounding 8 squares) is not targeted.

Actually, target is defined (per D&D Glossary online (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_target&alpha=)) as:

The intended recipient of an attack, spell, supernatural ability, extraordinary ability, or magical effect. If a targeted spell is successful, its recipient is known as the subject of the spell.

I would argue that the creatures in adjacent squares are very much intended recipients of my flasks of acid.

Gnaeus

2015-05-20, 11:57 AM

No, I'm not. Your problem is that you're contest the result of the tier syYou can, but that's not what the tier system did. The tier system assumed, as far as I know, as little outside ressources as possible.

Nope. The tier system assumes EQUAL OPTIMIZATION. Low op fighter vs low op wizard. High op fighter vs high op wizard. It doesn't assume that the fighter isn't taking feats. It assumes that if the fighter is an ubercharger doing 10,000 damage, the wizard is living in a demiplane rocking things with an astral projection. If the fighter is swinging a longsword for 1d8+8, the wizard is casting unmetamagiced scorching ray.

Where my specific issue with beguiler/DN falls on the system, is that I do not think that JaronK was correct in what exactly qualifies as equal optimization for these specific classes vs Sorcerer or Favored Soul. For example, if I recall the conversation correctly, JaronK wasn't assuming Arcane Disciple as a common thing because the Beguilers in his experience ended up as shadowcraft mages, so they didn't use the non-prc methods to expand spell-lists. Saying that option X from splatbook Y is mid-op, high op, or theoretical op is incredibly subjective. I, for example, think that Arcane Disciple on a Beguiler is a no-brainer (unless you have a plan to expand spell list in another way). Its mid op. I think dragonwrought kobold sorcs are theoretical op. There were disagreements.

That's why the tier system, no matter how arbitrary or rough a guideline it might be works. It assume so little that it is applicable everywhere baring houserules.

And it assumes so little that it is likely to be inaccurate when its assumptions do not apply. For example, if you assume an inability to pick your exact gear, which the tier list does assume, you are by definition underranking classes that have enhanced abilities to use gear if you are in a game where characters CAN buy items. The difference between a rogue being tier 4 and 3 could honestly be as little as "Is magicmart a thing".

Clearly you need to reread things because that's not at all what a sorcerer end up with. You're just....flat out wrong.

5+3+2+1. 11. Thats the SRD. I double checked just for you.

ComaVision

2015-05-20, 12:01 PM

I would argue that AoE wouldn't even dispel the images. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?187521-3-5-The-Mirror-Image-FAQ-thread)

No attack roll on the target, no sneak attack. It's precision damage. I think you acknowledged earlier that strict RAW isn't the discussion, and the RAI is clear.

Curmudgeon

2015-05-20, 12:05 PM

Actually, target is defined (per D&D Glossary online (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_target&alpha=)) as:
target: The intended recipient of an attack, spell, supernatural ability, extraordinary ability, or magical effect.
I would argue that the creatures in adjacent squares are very much intended recipients of my flasks of acid.
That argument doesn't work with the definition, because "recipient" is singular; your pluralization is outside the scope of the rules.

Also see the basic rules on this topic (Player's Handbook, page 158):
THROW SPLASH WEAPON
A splash weapon is a ranged weapon that breaks on impact, splashing or scattering its contents over its target and nearby creatures or objects.
...
A hit deals direct hit damage to the target, and splash damage to all creatures within 5 feet of the target. The target (direct hit) is distinguished from the "nearby creatures or objects" (surrounding splashed squares within 5' of the target).

Elderand

2015-05-20, 12:07 PM

5+3+2+1. 11. Thats the SRD. I double checked just for you.

Oh yeah ? Because here is what the SRD says

"At each new sorcerer level, he gains one or more new spells, as indicated on Table: Sorcerer Spells Known."

So what happen when you check the table ?

9 cantrips, 5 first, 5 second, 4 third, 4 fourth, 4 fifth, 3 sixth, 3 seventh, 3 eight, 3 nineth

total of 43 spells known at 20th level.

Unless I missed something and we were talking about spell known at a specific level rather than in total.

Brova

2015-05-20, 12:09 PM

That argument doesn't work with the definition, because "recipient" is singular; your pluralization is outside the scope of the rules.

Each one is a recipient, collectively they are recipients.

ComaVision

2015-05-20, 12:10 PM

Oh yeah ? Because here is what the SRD says

"At each new sorcerer level, he gains one or more new spells, as indicated on Table: Sorcerer Spells Known."

So what happen when you check the table ?

9 cantrips, 5 first, 5 second, 4 third, 4 fourth, 4 fifth, 3 sixth, 3 seventh, 3 eight, 3 nineth

total of 43 spells known at 20th level.

Unless I missed something and we were talking about spell known at a specific level rather than in total.

Sorry bro but he's talking about level 8 (he excluded the cantrips).

Curmudgeon

2015-05-20, 12:11 PM

Each one is a recipient, collectively they are recipients.
That doesn't work with the rules. I've updated my post to also quote the basic rule for splash weapons.

Elderand

2015-05-20, 12:20 PM

Sorry bro but he's talking about level 8 (he excluded the cantrips).

ah, I see, my bad. Somehow I totaly missed that.

dysprosium

2015-05-20, 12:22 PM

Actually, target is defined (per D&D Glossary online (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_target&alpha=)) as:

I would argue that the creatures in adjacent squares are very much intended recipients of my flasks of acid.

That glossary also defines splash weapon:

splash weapon
A ranged weapon that splashes on impact, dealing damage to creatures who are within 5 feet of the spot where it lands as well as to targets it actually hits. Attacks with splash weapons are ranged touch attacks.

Source: PHB

EDIT: ninja'd by Curmudgeon

As for classes that are terrible - I think most have been covered already. My list would include (in no particular order) Soulknife, Divine Mind, Commoner, and Soulborn. However if the idea is to play classes that your players normally don't choose, I believe that you can take a different approach.

What classes have they played already - individually or as a group? Remove those classes. Then remove the "obvious" power classes (however you end up defining them) and present what remains to them.

Brova

2015-05-20, 12:29 PM

That doesn't work with the rules. I've updated my post to also quote the basic rule for splash weapons.

Fair enough. That seems pretty ironclad.

Deadline

2015-05-20, 01:01 PM

I'll be sure to try out Brova's Tier System in actual practice. It doesn't look like it will actually prove to be a useful tool, but I thought the exact same thing about JaronK's Tier System when I first heard of it, and that one has proven to be fantastically useful in practice. So, fingers crossed on that.

I'm going to dig into the Mirror Image interaction with a splash weapon thought, because a mundane counter to that spell would be great to have.

Curmudgeon

2015-05-20, 01:42 PM

I think it's worth taking a step back from individual details here.

Rogue is not a terrible class, unless you're stuck with just what's in the Player's Handbook. The designers did get around to addressing most* of the class's issues eventually, but spread over dozens of different sources. The main strength of the class is its great flexibility: you can build Rogues for many different purposes. Because there's so much flexibility and so much of what you need is scattered about, it might be the single hardest D&D class to build and play effectively. That's terribly disorganized and terribly challenging, but not a terrible class.

Builds which emphasize a single trick (splash weapon specialization, highest number of sneak attack dice, & c.) illustrate this difficulty. (Adding munchkin tweaks like sneak attack applying to splash damage, or bonus feats ignoring prerequisites, add to the perceived difficulty: they make it look like you have to squint really hard at some of the rules to make the class effective. However, that's purely laziness.) Rather than addressing the class's many strengths and weaknesses comprehensively, they focus on a single strength and pretend the weaknesses don't matter. Sometimes that's true (kill the enemy fast, before they can exploit a weak point) but usually not enough of the time for reliability.

I like the Rogue class because I greatly enjoy optimization. I follow all the rules, yet there are enough options that I can make my characters sufficiently effective to keep up with Tier 2 characters in the party. If I started with a more powerful chassis (top Tier class) I'd either have to limit my optimization (less fun for me) or end up largely dominating the game (less fun for the other players). I also can build to satisfy many different needs with the Rogue chassis: scouting, combat power, infiltration, wealth acquisition, jack of all trades. The class is so flexible that often I end up running into meta-game limitations more than in-game challenges. Examples: can't use more than n sourcebooks; can't exceed Wealth by Level; can't go out for extra earning while party spellcasters are resting; can't get first pick of treasure even when scouting ahead and no other PCs are aware of what's there; can't use Sleight of Hand in combat. I stay within the actual game rules, but have little respect for players or DMs who think their expectations of how characters ought to be played should (without prior notice) become rigidly enforced house rules and limit my fun.

Again: Rogue is not a terrible class.

* - big exception: Hide in Plain Sight should be built into the D&D game's archetype stealthy class. You can get around this with the FR-specific Dark Creature template in Cormyr: The Tearing Of The Weave; yet the absolute failure of vision on the part of the game authors to address this as a class issue annoys me greatly.

sleepyphoenixx

2015-05-20, 04:26 PM

* - big exception: Hide in Plain Sight should be built into the D&D game's archetype stealthy class. You can get around this with the FR-specific Dark Creature template in Cormyr: The Tearing Of The Weave; yet the absolute failure of vision on the part of the game authors to address this as a class issue annoys me greatly.

I can't really agree with that. Not everything that might be useful needs to be a base class ability. You can play a rogue quite well without HiPS.
And other classes have to take PrC levels too to unlock the full potential of some of their abilities or take feats). That's pretty much what PrCs are for - you want to focus on stealth, take a stealthy PrC.

And there's at least five different versions of HiPS floating around, so it's not like you're screwed if your DM doesn't allow a campaign-specific feat from a rather obscure source (i'm rather fond of dipping into OA's Ninja Spy for my rogues. YMMV).

HiPS is supposed to be a rare ability. Something that only the best and sneakiest of sneaky buggers learn. It's not something that every run of the mill rogue should have, and it's also not something that every rogue needs.

bekeleven

2015-05-20, 06:03 PM

HiPS is supposed to be a rare ability. Something that only the best and sneakiest of sneaky buggers learn.So, like, an 11th level rogue?

Rogues are common. Rogues with expees are not.

Extra Anchovies

2015-05-20, 06:26 PM

So, like, an 11th level rogue?

Rogues are common. Rogues with expees are not.

Indeed. HiPS should be offered as a rogue special ability.

bekeleven

2015-05-20, 07:26 PM

Indeed. HiPS should be offered as a rogue special ability.

Consider that in all of OotS, I think Haley and Buzzock are the only rogues past 10th level (Crystal maybe, depending on how many levels of assassin she took). Plus I think one of the scribblers, way back when.

atemu1234

2015-05-20, 07:29 PM

Consider that in all of OotS, I think Haley and Buzzock are the only rogues past 10th level (Crystal maybe, depending on how many levels of assassin she took). Plus I think one of the scribblers, way back when.

Isn't it Bozzok?

Flickerdart

2015-05-20, 07:46 PM

Isn't it Bozzok?
Never Mind the Bozzoks.

atemu1234

2015-05-20, 07:53 PM

Never Mind the Bozzoks.

Anarchy in the Great Wheel!

nedz

2015-05-20, 08:29 PM

Anarchy in the Great Wheel!

WotC

123465789

Curmudgeon

2015-05-20, 08:44 PM

Indeed. HiPS should be offered as a rogue special ability.
It already is, via the Wilderness Rogue (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#rogueVariantWilderness Rogue) variant. However, 13th level is way too late for Hide in Plain Sight. HiPS merely allows you to make Hide checks; it doesn't guarantee that they will succeed for opposed checks (1 round). Greater Invisibility is available to Wizards at level 7, and that is guaranteed to make you unseen without any checks (7+ rounds).

Why are people claiming that a Rogue should be less stealthy than a Wizard?

Flickerdart

2015-05-20, 09:03 PM

Hiding as part of movement beats hiding as a standard action any day. Especially hiding that you can do all day, and that evades magical detection like true seeing.

Curmudgeon

2015-05-20, 09:18 PM

Hiding as part of movement beats hiding as a standard action any day.
That's just the first round. Being required to move in order to Hide on every subsequent round, compared to no action at all for Greater Invisibility to continue working, has the Wizard beating the Rogue in terms of actions most of the time. True Seeing doesn't come online for Sorcerers/Wizards until 4 levels after Greater Invisibility.

Flickerdart

2015-05-20, 09:22 PM

That's just the first round. Being required to move in order to Hide on every subsequent round, compared to no action at all for Greater Invisibility to continue working, has the Wizard beating the Rogue in terms of actions most of the time.
It's not super hard to find a source of movement that doesn't have an action cost, though.

Curmudgeon

2015-05-20, 09:42 PM

It's not super hard to find a source of movement that doesn't have an action cost, though.
They exist, but come with restrictions. A 5' step precludes all other movement for the round. A 10' Tumble adjustment requires a DC 40 check. And, of course, you're forced out of your hiding spot.

Story

2015-05-20, 10:34 PM

A low op sorcerer has bad spells known. He may focus on a single area, like invocation or necromancy. Beguilers and DNs have a very high optimization floor, because they have 1. better hp. 2. better armor. 3. a preset and very decent spell list. At low levels, it is pretty hard for a sorc to equal beguiler casting, even with decent opti-fu. 4 actual class abilities other than casting.

I recall one story posted here about a low-op Sorcerer who one day chose Polymorph, glanced through the MM for cool looking monsters, and broke the game entirely on accident. Good luck doing that on a low op Beguiler.

Y'all need to present problems that the Beguiler can't solve before you can claim "versatility" as an advantage

How do you handle the pirate ship adventure I mentioned? At the very least you'r burning gold for UMD if you even managed to have the right items in the first place. By comparison, a Wizard will typically be able to solve it with no preparation or permanent resource expenditure and a Druid just laughs at the whole thing. (Say level 8 for simplicity, since it's a CR8 challenge)

So Wizards can buy scrolls to use with their spellbooks (remember, the alternative is that they only get two spells a level), but Rogues can't buy those same scrolls to use with their UMD?

Well depending on the DM, the Wizard can usually get spells much cheaper by using the Copying a Spellbook and Mastering a Spellbook rules. But even if you have to buy scrolls, it's still a one time cost, compared to the Rogue. And you get free CL and save DC scaling.

You mean the breath weapon that allows a Rogue to make a reflex save for half none?

Fair enough. It is a CR5 challenge after all.

Sorry, those must have gotten lost. Remind me what you asked about?

* Airship attacked by dragons
* Explore a sunken pirate ship and fight off a Giant Octopus
* Fight an Erinye in a large open space above ground
* Travel 500 miles in under a week

Depends what you mean. In practical optimization (i.e. no planar binding, charm, or polymorph shenanigans) a Flask Rogue absolutely keeps up.

Based on personal experience, I'd say that's not the case. I was once in a campaign full of shameless munchkinry, and someone played a concept similar to Flask Rogue. (He used acid flasks at low levels, but switched to NPC castings of Fire Shruiken and later used Maiming Strike to convert to CHA damage). He could basically point at anyone and say die and kill them in the surprise round, but he was still heavily reliant on the Wizard for everything that wasn't direct damage or the occasional sneaking. And also buffs.

sleepyphoenixx

2015-05-21, 01:55 AM

It already is, via the Wilderness Rogue (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#rogueVariantWilderness Rogue) variant. However, 13th level is way too late for Hide in Plain Sight. HiPS merely allows you to make Hide checks; it doesn't guarantee that they will succeed for opposed checks (1 round). Greater Invisibility is available to Wizards at level 7, and that is guaranteed to make you unseen without any checks (7+ rounds).

Why are people claiming that a Rogue should be less stealthy than a Wizard?

A wizard under Invisibility isn't all that stealthy. Read the rules on spot & listen checks. It takes a flat DC 20 spot check to counter, which isn't all that hard to reach.
A rogue who puts maximum ranks into hide & ms is pretty close to undetectable though, as long as he gets Darkstalker.

Again, you don't need HiPS to sneak effectively. It's a nice and useful thing to have, but it's not a necessity.

Curmudgeon

2015-05-21, 02:38 AM

A wizard under Invisibility isn't all that stealthy. Read the rules on spot & listen checks. It takes a flat DC 20 spot check to counter, which isn't all that hard to reach.
You might want to recheck those details. DC 20 simply alters you that someone is "there", without telling you anything other than it's "within 30 feet". To me, that's no "counter".

sleepyphoenixx

2015-05-21, 04:56 AM

You might want to recheck those details. DC 20 simply alters you that someone is "there", without telling you anything other than it's "within 30 feet". To me, that's no "counter".

It is when the point of being stealthy is that no one knows you're there, which is what you usually sneak around for. Invisibility isn't hard to counter even through mundane means.
Knowing that someone is there also lets you make a listen check, with a DC of the enemies MS +20 to pinpoint. For anyone who actually spends ranks in listen it's trivial by mid-levels to pinpoint someone invisible who doesn't have MS.

In combat you're probably more worried about negating the total concealment, but you can't hide while attacking anyway (not even with HiPS). You'll need invisibility for that.

I stand by the assertion that HiPS isn't absolutely necessary for a stealthy character. It's just nice to have.
You can be sneaky without it. It's easy enough to get if you want it by taking a PrC, an item or a template. It's easy enough to emulate with a number of different abilities, starting with getting invisibility yourself.
It doesn't need to be an ability of the base rogue class. That's pretty much what PrCs are for - expanding your options and/or making you better at what you do.

Brova

2015-05-21, 05:43 AM

I recall one story posted here about a low-op Sorcerer who one day chose Polymorph, glanced through the MM for cool looking monsters, and broke the game entirely on accident. Good luck doing that on a low op Beguiler.

Dumpster diving the MMs for minions breaks the game almost as hard as dumpster diving them for polymorph forms. It's better early because you can start at level 1 or 2 and get multiple minions, but worse late because of shapechange abuse.

How do you handle the pirate ship adventure I mentioned? At the very least you'r burning gold for UMD if you even managed to have the right items in the first place. By comparison, a Wizard will typically be able to solve it with no preparation or permanent resource expenditure and a Druid just laughs at the whole thing. (Say level 8 for simplicity, since it's a CR8 challenge)

Sure. I'll rainbow pattern the octopuses. Save or lose against a +3 Will save.

* Airship attacked by dragons

Depends on the dragon's tactics. If they close to flask range, it's over. Acid or alchemists fire will kill and dragon unless it bothered to learn and cast energy resistance or energy immunity. If it tries to blow up the airship, that's a little more of a problem, but less than half of Dragons actually have DR magic before teleport comes online and obsoletes the adventure, so you can try to throw down with some arrows.

The Beguiler just casts save or dies, deploys minions, or maybe casts some other spells he's added to his list.

* Explore a sunken pirate ship and fight off a Giant Octopus

The flask Rogue has some trouble, mostly because he can't throw flasks underwater. His best bet is the shortbow.

The Beguiler just casts rainbow pattern and is done with it.

* Fight an Erinye in a large open space above ground

The Rogue's not in a good position here. The obvious question is why you're fighting a flying archer in a large open space to begin with, but it is likely that the Rogue loses this one. Of course, some Wizards will lose this as well. Perhaps most even as the Erinye can ready against spellcasting.

The Beguiler can just charm monster. While that's not super likely to work, it's basically the same plan the Wizard has.

* Travel 500 miles in under a week

Both the Rogue and the Beguiler have Abuse Magic Device as a class skill.

Based on personal experience, I'd say that's not the case. I was once in a campaign full of shameless munchkinry, and someone played a concept similar to Flask Rogue. (He used acid flasks at low levels, but switched to NPC castings of Fire Shruiken and later used Maiming Strike to convert to CHA damage). He could basically point at anyone and say die and kill them in the surprise round, but he was still heavily reliant on the Wizard for everything that wasn't direct damage or the occasional sneaking. And also buffs.

So the characters were balanced in combat, but had different strengths outside of combat? And this means a Rogue can't keep up?

unbeliever536

2015-05-21, 05:45 AM

In combat you're probably more worried about negating the total concealment, but you can't hide while attacking anyway (not even with HiPS). You'll need invisibility for that.

Oh look: the wizard just out-rogued the rogue. Again.

sleepyphoenixx

2015-05-21, 06:00 AM

Oh look: the wizard just out-rogued the rogue. Again.

Apples and oranges. Hide/MS is much better than invisibility if you're actually trying to be stealthy. Total Concealment in combat can be gotten in any number of ways, and the most effective ways all come from items anyway.

Flickerdart

2015-05-21, 09:59 AM

Dumpster diving the MMs for minions breaks the game almost as hard as dumpster diving them for polymorph forms. It's better early because you can start at level 1 or 2 and get multiple minions, but worse late because of shapechange abuse.
"Dumpster diving for minions" is a lot less practical since you have to actually find them in the game world and succeed in charming them to your cause. For polymoprh the sorcerer can just say "ooh, I want to be a dragon!" and a dragon he is.

Brova

2015-05-21, 10:06 AM

"Dumpster diving for minions" is a lot less practical since you have to actually find them in the game world and succeed in charming them to your cause. For polymoprh the sorcerer can just say "ooh, I want to be a dragon!" and a dragon he is.

I mean, planar binding is a spell. Or you know, just the stuff you encounter. The trade off is that you get worse selection in exchange for having more minions. There's no limit to the number of critters you can charm and diplomacy into minions.

Story

2015-05-21, 10:31 AM

Sure. I'll rainbow pattern the octopuses. Save or lose against a +3 Will save.

How are you getting the ability to breath underwater in the first place?

Both the Rogue and the Beguiler have Abuse Magic Device as a class skill

So once again, you're having to spend gold to emulate something a T1 can do without thinking.

P.S. I've never seen a game where the DM lets you keep lots of minions around. I suppose this is a table dependent thing but it just doesn't seem realistic. Also, if you're just asking NPCs to help you, you're probably going to have to give them a share of the treasure and XP. Charm != mind control, remember?

Deadline

2015-05-21, 10:32 AM

There's no limit to the number of critters you can charm and diplomacy into minions.

True, but this plan is pretty much trounced entirely by a 1st level defensive spell, so relying on it to solve all of your encounter problems isn't terribly useful. Still, if you have a DM that lets you build a stable of minions and provides zero hard counters to your very limited bag of tricks, the Beguiler is awesome.

For what it's worth, I really like all of the fixed list casters (even that class that only a mother could love, the Warmage). I've often thought of trying out a game where every player played some sort of magic school specialist (a fixed list caster for Enchantment, Necromancy, or Evocation, or a Focused Specialist Wizard), with the exception that Conjuration couldn't be a choice, and would heavily restrict the sorts of Conjuration spells a non-fixed list caster could choose. No PrCs, because Rainbow Servant isn't a test of the classes, but otherwise relatively open. I'd be keen to see how well they perform. I think they'd all be pretty close in power, because a Focused Specialist has such a narrow band of versatility that it should fall right in line with the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer.

Flickerdart

2015-05-21, 10:39 AM

I mean, planar binding is a spell. Or you know, just the stuff you encounter. The trade off is that you get worse selection in exchange for having more minions. There's no limit to the number of critters you can charm and diplomacy into minions.
Do beguilers get planar binding?

ComaVision

2015-05-21, 10:39 AM

Still, if you have a DM that lets you build a stable of minions and provides zero hard counters to your very limited bag of tricks, the [any class] is awesome.

Fixed that for you.

Brova

2015-05-21, 10:45 AM

True, but this plan is pretty much trounced entirely by a 1st level defensive spell, so relying on it to solve all of your encounter problems isn't terribly useful. Still, if you have a DM that lets you build a stable of minions and provides zero hard counters to your very limited bag of tricks, the Beguiler is awesome.

First, it's only foiled if the target is already under the effects of protection from whatever.

Second, the vast majority of monsters can't cast spells, let alone protection from whatever.

Third, it's not your only trick. For example, you've got various illusions. Or minions you've charmed already. Or spells you swindled from other lists.

For what it's worth, I really like all of the fixed list casters (even that class that only a mother could love, the Warmage). I've often thought of trying out a game where every player played some sort of magic school specialist (a fixed list caster for Enchantment, Necromancy, or Evocation, or a Focused Specialist Wizard), with the exception that Conjuration couldn't be a choice, and would heavily restrict the sorts of Conjuration spells a non-fixed list caster could choose.

It is unquestionably true that it is better from a game design perspective to have people on thematic lists. Not only is that easier to balance, it's more thematic and better represents the characters people want to play. There isn't a character I can think of that has "magic" as his thing. Gandalf gets some blasting, but no summons or necromancy or illusions. Harry Potter has a variety of magic, but no real blasting, no summons, and nothing like D&D divination.

If I was making a new edition of D&D, I'd split Wizard into at least one class for each school. Cleric probably needs to split at least along offensive/defensive lines. Druid could go like four different directions (turning into a bear, having pet bears, nature magic, maybe elemental magic) at least. You could seriously make an entire game with more (core) classes than any edition of D&D with just spellcasters.

Deadline

2015-05-21, 10:49 AM

It is unquestionably true that it is better from a game design perspective to have people on thematic lists. Not only is that easier to balance, it's more thematic and better represents the characters people want to play.

I'm led to believe that the Spheres of Power book does exactly this. I need to pick up a copy and take a look, because it sounds pretty terrific.

Jormengand

2015-05-21, 11:00 AM

Fixed that for you.

Try commoner.

Actually, no, try warrior, because I'm not letting you get away with chicken-infested tricks.

Curmudgeon

2015-05-21, 12:03 PM

In combat you're probably more worried about negating the total concealment, but you can't hide while attacking anyway (not even with HiPS). You'll need invisibility for that.
The actual rules would like to say hello.
It’s practically impossible (-20 penalty) to hide while attacking, running or charging. That's exactly what Hide in Plain Sight (at least a version which bypasses both the "cannot be observed" and cover/concealment requirements) enables.

bekeleven

2015-05-21, 12:05 PM

Has nobody mentioned that charm-based minionmancy doesn't work?

Charm doesn't reset a person's additude. They're still hostile or whatever, they just treat you as friendly. If you attempt to diplomacy, you can diplomacy them up from hostile, but even if you succeed in getting them up to helpful (and how would you know?), they're still treated as friendly for the duration of the spell.

Then, when the spell expires, they'll likely move at least 1 step less friendly from you and avoid you forever (or attack).

The spell's not an attitude adjustment, it's an overlay. Much less useful.

Deadline

2015-05-21, 12:15 PM

Has nobody mentioned that charm-based minionmancy doesn't work?

There's a surprising amount of people that seem to think Charm + Diplomacy = Dominate. That's demonstrably untrue, but tiring to argue repeatedly. Charm + Diplomacy is good, and depending on the DM and the situation, it can get you a few potentially useful uncontrolled "minions". How those minions treat the rest of the party is a matter of some debate, and can really limit their usefulness. But even with that, Charm can be a great primary or supplemental power for face-character duties.

The DM interpretation required to get most of the spells in the Enchantment and Illusion schools to operate at a truly effective level let alone an optimal one is a frequent reason they are listed as poor choices to specialize in (and why Enchantment is one of the first schools suggested as dropping when creating a specialist wizard). Illusion manages to escape that mold thanks to having several straightforward spells that operate as a way to expand versatility (the shadow conjuration and evocation spells specifically), as well as by having a TO trick that makes them weirdly potent (Illusions that are more than 100% real).

Brova

2015-05-21, 01:17 PM

Has nobody mentioned that charm-based minionmancy doesn't work?

Charm doesn't reset a person's additude. They're still hostile or whatever, they just treat you as friendly. If you attempt to diplomacy, you can diplomacy them up from hostile, but even if you succeed in getting them up to helpful (and how would you know?), they're still treated as friendly for the duration of the spell.

So "treated as friendly" doesn't mean that they are treated as friendly when you diplomacy them? That's certainly an interesting position, but not one that is very close to being defensible.

bekeleven

2015-05-21, 01:58 PM

So "treated as friendly" doesn't mean that they are treated as friendly when you diplomacy them? That's certainly an interesting position, but not one that is very close to being defensible.

No, it's a magical effect that makes them regard you as a friend and ally. It changes their behavior for its duration; it has no RAW effect on the diplomacy skill.

Furthermore, it has no lasting effect, meaning that when it expires the NPC wonders, "Why was I so nice to that enchanter for a few hours the-- OOOOH" and probably attacks you if their int is above 8.

squiggit

2015-05-21, 02:04 PM

it has no RAW effect on the diplomacy skill.
Friendly->Helpful is DC20 as opposed to DC50 for Hostile->Helpful and since you treat them as friendly, seems like you'd use the former numbers.

Which is definitely an effect.

bekeleven

2015-05-21, 02:09 PM

Friendly->Helpful is DC20 as opposed to DC50 for Hostile->Helpful and since you treat them as friendly, seems like you'd use the former numbers.

Which is definitely an effect.
Which would be great, if it actually changed their attitude. If that's what the spell did, it would have been fewer words to write.

Lans

2015-05-21, 02:23 PM

At the flask rogue- it seems kind of expensive for the first half of the game. 10 gp per vial is expensive at 1st, extradimensional storage is expensive before 5, and ring of blinking is expensive before 11th

Magikeeper

2015-05-21, 02:50 PM

@Charm: First off, you don't need to screw around with diplomacy abuse. Check this section, taken from the part of the DMG (pg 291) that clarifies how a charmed creature behaves. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#charmAndCompulsion)

Note this: "A charmed character is entitled to an opposed Charisma check against his master in order to resist instructions or commands that would make him do something he wouldn’t normally do even for a close friend. If he succeeds, he decides not to go along with that order but remains charmed."

Other bits note they never do suicidal/grievously harmful stuff, save when they do a thing violently opposed to, etc, but RAW-wise charm is a slightly more restricted dominate with charisma checks. True, charm person only lasts a few hours. But charm monster lasts as long as dominate person and comes online a level earlier.

Also, if you are letting diplomacy minion-ize people in the first place you hardly need charm to build up a large number of them (unless everyone worth minion-izing is hostile towards you, at least).
As to whether or not it counts for diplomacy.. eh, I can see both arguments. I think letting diplomacy turn people into long-term minions is a bad idea in the first place, though.

On schools: Enchantment being a good drop choice has everything to do with mind-effecting immunity being extremely common. In a world without rampant immunity to the entire school* enchantment would be a powerful option. Crazily so, perhaps. A lot of the school's more reasonable effects suffer from enemies (and allies) needing to be immune to dominate and friends. :/

Illusion is gutted by Truesight. The shadow stuff can ignore / be empowered by Truesight, which is about the only high-op illusionist stuff you see running about.

*There is, to my knowledge, only one enchantment spell that doesn't have the descriptor - but that might not even matter as the description of the enchantment school says ALL enchantment spells are mind-effecting and the one exception never says it isn't mind effecting.

Gnaeus

2015-05-21, 02:52 PM

I recall one story posted here about a low-op Sorcerer who one day chose Polymorph, glanced through the MM for cool looking monsters, and broke the game entirely on accident. Good luck doing that on a low op Beguiler..

So he got lucky and chose a good spell. How did he glance through the MM again? Low OP sorc probably isn't covered up in knowledges.

Beguiler finds a bad humanoid, looks at his spell list, casts Dominate. Thats easier.

Alternately, fine, low op sorcerer gets lucky and picks Polymorph as his level 4 spell. Explain to me how Polymorph breaks more encounters than:
Charm Monster
Freedom of Movement
Mass Whelm
Locate Creature
Confusion
Solid Fog
Crushing Despair
Greater Mirror Image
Phantom Battle
and Rainbow Pattern
All put together.

Polymorph really isn't an encounter ender, usually. It buffs your fighter a lot, but Greater Invisibility is sometimes a better combat buff, especially if your team has a rogue. Solid Fog trivializes encounters. Confusion can trivialize encounters. Charm Monster can trivialize encounters depending on what kind of encounter it is. Yeah, I think I'll take those spells over Polymorph.

* Fight an Erinye in a large open space above ground
* Travel 500 miles in under a week

Cast Solid Fog on the Erinye and walk away.
Shadow Walk.

And you know, we aren't saying that the beguiler is a T1 that beats a wizard. I am saying that the beguiler is a T2 that is highly comparable to a sorcerer or favored soul. An individual Sorcerer or Favored Soul is likely to have problems with some of those challenges as well. Your level 8 sorcerer with Polymorph is going to have a harder time than my Beguiler with Solid Fog.

"Dumpster diving for minions" is a lot less practical since you have to actually find them in the game world and succeed in charming them to your cause. For polymoprh the sorcerer can just say "ooh, I want to be a dragon!" and a dragon he is.

A Dragon he is indeed. With no SU's, +4 BAB, and the physical stats of a dragon with a CR half his level. Yeah, its a decent spellcasting platform. It doesn't suck. But Dominate person actually gives the abilities of the guy you dominate, not make you into an inferior copy of a thing you could have killed several levels before.

Oh, and that assumes that Low Op sorc with his bad int and 2 skill points per level can even polymorph into the dragon in question.

True, but this plan is pretty much trounced entirely by a 1st level defensive spell, so relying on it to solve all of your encounter problems isn't terribly useful. Still, if you have a DM that lets you build a stable of minions and provides zero hard counters to your very limited bag of tricks, the Beguiler is awesome.

Why does everyone keep pretending that my bag of tricks is limited? At low through mid levels, the Beguiler often has a wider ranging bag of tricks than even a decently built sorcerer, and can expand his tricks more easily.

Beguiler, for example, can take one feat, pick up Polymorph from a cleric domain, and then he's a dragon too, except that unlike the sorcerer, he has a dozen level 4 spells he can cast as a dragon, and unlike the sorcerer, as an int caster with 6 skill points per level, he actually has a plausible argument that he is familiar enough with monsters to go MM diving.

Deadline

2015-05-21, 03:06 PM

Why does everyone keep pretending that my bag of tricks is limited?

Because it is?

At low through mid levels, the Beguiler often has a wider ranging bag of tricks than even a decently built sorcerer, and can expand his tricks more easily.

Yes, they sit really nicely in that Tier 2 range in my opinion. Good skills and a spell list (up to 9th level spells) that isn't complete garbage is generally enough to get you there.

squiggit

2015-05-21, 03:09 PM

Which would be great, if it actually changed their attitude. If that's what the spell did, it would have been fewer words to write.
Erm. I'm not sure why you keep saying that. No one suggested that it changes their attitude, but you do treat it as friendly for the duration. I'm not sure where the problem is.

Elderand

2015-05-21, 03:23 PM

Yes, they sit really nicely in that Tier 2 range in my opinion. Good skills and a spell list (up to 9th level spells) that isn't complete garbage is generally enough to get you there.

No, it's not

Tier 1 and 2 are not defined by access to good 9 level spells. It's defined by access to gamebreaking spells (and not just 9th or truenamer and adept would be tier 2). The spells a beguiler gets aren't bad, they're just not gamebreaking enough for it to count as tier 2, let alone tier 1.

Deadline

2015-05-21, 03:31 PM

Gnaeus

2015-05-21, 03:39 PM

They do get Foresight, Mind Blank, and Timestop, but perhaps those aren't quite gamebreaking enough (and with being restricted to Illusion and Enchantment spells for Advanced Learning, I'm not sure they can get any of the big game breakers). I'm probably confusing their being able to jump up a tier with PrC additions.

If book diving is restricted to a few sources, I'll take the core Animal domain for Shapechange (as well as some other useful SNAs). As optimization levels go up, there are multiple domains rocking wish, miracle and gate, so I can choose my poison.

Elderand

2015-05-21, 03:45 PM

They do get Foresight, Mind Blank, and Timestop, but perhaps those aren't quite gamebreaking enough (and with being restricted to Illusion and Enchantment spells for Advanced Learning, I'm not sure they can get any of the big game breakers). I'm probably confusing their being able to jump up a tier with PrC additions.

Oh with the right PRC they can absolutly jump up to tier 1, but that's the power of the PRC. Even if their casting method make them very suitable and mesh well with those PRC that just mean they'd be slightly higher up in tier 1 than another spellcaster who got that same PRC, at that point the difference become trivial.

Don't get me wrong, beguiler is great, but idependently of PRC and a few specific feats they aren't tier 2.

Gnaeus

2015-05-21, 03:50 PM

No, it's not

Tier 1 and 2 are not defined by access to good 9 level spells. It's defined by access to gamebreaking spells (and not just 9th or truenamer and adept would be tier 2). The spells a beguiler gets aren't bad, they're just not gamebreaking enough for it to count as tier 2, let alone tier 1.

Also, this is only a partial truth.

T1s and 2s do have access to gamebreaking spells. They also share access to a wide variety of spells that make them potentially useful in any encounter. Number of campaign nukes is the least useful defining feature of what makes a T1. Yes, a sorcerer or wizard can break the game with T1 spells by being a ****. A level 1 fighter can also break the game by being a ****. Breaking the game is not the goal.

If game nukes are the benchmark, it is easy to get game nukes on the fixed list casters. But who cares? If the ability to dominate a wide range of encounter types is the issue, they are there by default.

Edit: Anyway, the tier list is weighted towards 6-15, then 1-5. None of that stuff comes into play much until 17+, which is the least common part of the game. No one has so far been able to argue that a Sorc 8 has the versatility of a Beguiler 8. If Beguiler is better at 1-9, roughly equal at 10-11, and worse at 12+ (and I do not remotely concede that they are worse at 12+, but the number of options available for the sorc makes it harder to prove without resorting to specific builds, and at some point the discussion just breaks down when we fall into unwinnable arguments about what "equivalent optimization" means and whether sorcerer trick X is higher or lower op than beguiler trick Y) I'm not really going to call the sorc better over a given campaign.

* Explore a sunken pirate ship and fight off a Giant Octopus

Sorry, I forgot the win on this one. Ray of stupidity acquired from advanced learning one shots any animal with a ranged touch attack. The bigger, the better. That one will be trivializing encounters with critters for many CR to come. Once it gets metamagiced, it trivializes lots of encounters.

General Sajaru

2015-05-21, 04:52 PM

On the subject of Charm X and diplomacy, while the SRD or eratta may have changed this, from PHB, pg. 209: "This charm makes a humanoid creature regard you as its trusted friend and ally (treat the target’s attitude as friendly; see Influencing NPC Attitudes, page 72)."

Flickerdart

2015-05-21, 05:28 PM

But Dominate person actually gives the abilities of the guy you dominate, not make you into an inferior copy of a thing you could have killed several levels before.
Unfortunately, the more powerful a guy is, the harder he will be to dominate, so there's that too.

Oh, and that assumes that Low Op sorc with his bad int and 2 skill points per level can even polymorph into the dragon in question.

Polymorph contains no rules for interaction with skill checks.

Brova

2015-05-21, 06:43 PM

I get that true seeing and mindblank counter the Beguilers normal tricks. But those aren't the standard loadout of anything from the MM. It seems dishonest to claim that monsters will be modified to use sixth or eighth level spells to counter PCs, but that we aren't allowed to count feats or magic items even in cases where they uniquely benefit that class.

On the subject of Charm X and diplomacy, while the SRD or eratta may have changed this, from PHB, pg. 209: "This charm makes a humanoid creature regard you as its trusted friend and ally (treat the target’s attitude as friendly; see Influencing NPC Attitudes, page 72)."

This is what I'm basing my argument off as well. As far as I can tell, charm temporarily swaps the creature's attitude to friendly, then a DC 20 Diplomacy check puts it to helpful forever. And that Diplomacy check is a permanent nonmagical effect that is not mind effecting and can't be dispelled. The worst case is that you use lockdown spells like rainbow pattern, dispel protections, then charm.

Oh with the right PRC they can absolutly jump up to tier 1, but that's the power of the PRC.

He's not taking a PrC. He's taking a feat. I daresay he's taking the single best feat for a Beguiler. Saying that a Beguiler doesn't have options because he wont take Arcane Disciple is like saying the Incantatrix is weak because he won't take Persist Spell.

And again, Rainbow Servant is uniquely powerful in the hands of Beguilers. Not only do they pay no opportunity cost for having all the random utility spells, they can pull them out at the drop of a hat.

Story

2015-05-21, 09:17 PM

So he got lucky and chose a good spell. How did he glance through the MM again? Low OP sorc probably isn't covered up in knowledges.

Not everyone houserules Knowledge checks into Polymorph.

Alternately, fine, low op sorcerer gets lucky and picks Polymorph as his level 4 spell. Explain to me how Polymorph breaks more encounters than:
Charm Monster
Freedom of Movement
Mass Whelm
Locate Creature
Confusion
Solid Fog
Crushing Despair
Greater Mirror Image
Phantom Battle
and Rainbow Pattern
All put together.

I'm not familiar with all those spells off the top of my head, but I will point out that unlike most of the spells you just mentioned, Polymorph works equally well against creatures that are immune to mind-affecting. Also, it has more out of combat utility. And it scales much better with level.

Cast Solid Fog on the Erinye and walk away.

At will Greater Teleport says hi.

And you know, we aren't saying that the beguiler is a T1 that beats a wizard.

I think Brova did in fact argue that.

Sorry, I forgot the win on this one. Ray of stupidity acquired from advanced learning one shots any animal with a ranged touch attack.

The hard part here is getting the ability to breath underwater in the first place.

I get that true seeing and mindblank counter the Beguilers normal tricks. But those aren't the standard loadout of anything from the MM

Undead, plants, vermin, etc. are immune to mind effecting. Most high level Outsiders get True Seeing.

Lans

2015-05-22, 04:47 AM

This is what I'm basing my argument off as well. As far as I can tell, charm temporarily swaps the creature's attitude to friendly, then a DC 20 Diplomacy check puts it to helpful forever. /QUOTE]

I would argue it only lasts till the charm ends, might not be raw, but its how i would run it.

[QUOTE]He's not taking a PrC. He's taking a feat. I daresay he's taking the single best feat for a Beguiler. Saying that a Beguiler doesn't have options because he wont take Arcane Disciple is like saying the Incantatrix is weak because he won't take Persist Spell.

Arcane Disciple does give you wisdom dependancy

Brova

2015-05-22, 05:53 AM

Arcane Disciple does give you wisdom dependancy

Not really. You need 13/14 Wis with boosts from wish or a +Wis item. That's not really bad, considering it also boosts a save and you don't really need much by way of other stats. And if your game is only going to be in the 6 - 10 range, you only need 13 - 15 Wis at all. That isn't all that bad, especially considering you only really need Int otherwise.

Gnaeus

2015-05-22, 06:11 AM

Not everyone houserules Knowledge checks into Polymorph.

Most people hold that rummaging through the monster manual for monster stat blocks without the skills that let you know what monsters are is cheating.

I'm not familiar with all those spells off the top of my head, but I will point out that unlike most of the spells you just mentioned, Polymorph works equally well against creatures that are immune to mind-affecting.

So does Solid Fog, and it stops at least as many encounters as Polymorph.

Also, it has more out of combat utility.
It has more MOVEMENT modes. Charm Monster has plenty of out of combat utility. Any social encounter I can rock the sorcerers world in multiple ways( skills, disguise, glibness, charms). Unlike the sorcerer I have built in Stealth, augmented by spells (Invisibility, Invisibility sphere). Unlike the sorcerer I have built in trapfinding, augmented by spells (Knock, dispel magic). I also have Comprehend Languages, Detect Secret Doors, Detect Thoughts, See Invisibility, Arcane Sight, Clairvoyance, Locate creature, and most probably much better spot/listen. Yes, you have easier access to flight and swim speed (although I do get spider climb). I'm happy comparing out of combat utility on a mid level beguiler and sorcerer.

For in combat, my options are strictly better. If we are alone, Polymorph just makes you into a target that is going to get its butt kicked. If we have a party, Greater Invisibility, Displacement, Haste, and Slow are probably a better variety of combat buffs and debuffs than you can muster.

And it scales much better with level.

Since I get more spells than you do at every level, it had better.

The hard part here is getting the ability to breath underwater in the first place.

Well, since you probably didn't spend one of your third level slots on water breathing (since it is a terrible spell for a sorc), and since polymorph lasts minutes, we are probably both buying potions or asking the cleric or druid to memorize it.

Undead, plants, vermin, etc. are immune to mind effecting. Most high level Outsiders get True Seeing.

1. But not many things have BOTH.
2. I have shown there are plenty of capable spells on my list that are neither
3. Even lacking the base abilities to expand my spell list, I do still have UMD. In the corner cases where I don't have the right spell, I will use an item, just like a sorcerer would. I stress that these are corner cases.

Unfortunately, the more powerful a guy is, the harder he will be to dominate, so there's that too.

Not too much. Your real gold standard for dominate person is a rogue or fighter. At level 10, when I get dominate person, my save DC on dominate is likely to be at least 20. (Say, 16 starting int, 2 int bumps, +2 int item, so 20 int=+5, level 5 spell=DC 20. We're low op here, it should be higher). A 12-14th level NPC fighter or rogue is likely to have a will save in the +4-+8 range. (+4 base, +0-2 wisdom, +1-2 resistance). I've got a pretty good chance to ensnare any non paladin/monk muggle in my CR range. Lacking thuddy people in the normal course of events, I can always make it a character goal to find a group of bandits or orcs or a rogues guild and go dominate their leaders

But wait, at the same level I get Dominate, I also get mind fog. A 12-13th level cleric or monk, my worst case target, is likely to have a will save in the +11-16 range (+8 base, +3-6 wis, +1-2 resistance). Give me a good set of circumstances (I sneak in, get a surprise round, cast mind fog, Round 1, target still flat footed, Cloaked Caster adds +2 to my DC, Mind fog -10 to their saves) and I can dominate pretty much humanoid in my CR range who hadn't already cast protection from evil. Give me a standard low op party (Or some cr appropriate minions), where we have a fighter or rogue willing to drop humanoids with non-lethal damage, and I have an incredibly good chance to be able to dominate anyone I want.

Flickerdart

2015-05-22, 09:24 AM

But wait, at the same level I get Dominate, I also get mind fog.
They still need to fail the same save so it's pointless.

ComaVision

2015-05-22, 09:34 AM

So if you Charm someone and then roll a 1 on a Diplomacy check they're Friendly beyond the duration of the spell? That doesn't make sense to me, it doesn't even take an investment. I would say they're magically stuck at Friendly for the duration of the spell and then go back to whatever they were previously.

Gnaeus

2015-05-22, 10:14 AM

They still need to fail the same save so it's pointless.

Poo. You're right. I'm wrong. Ok, instead of mind fog, I just have to cast dominate twice. Now, with cloaked casting, I only have between roughly 3/4 and 1/2 chance of taking a good will save, wisdom focused character a couple of levels above me and making them my slave. I can't bring myself to feel too bad about that.

And it is still true that if we can beat them in combat and strip their stat buff and resistance items, their chances of joining me go up dramatically.

Mr Adventurer

2015-05-22, 10:19 AM

So... you're saying... that Beguilers shouldn't be on my list?!

Flickerdart

2015-05-22, 10:20 AM

And it is still true that if we can beat them in combat and strip their stat buff and resistance items, their chances of joining me go up dramatically.
Well, defeat does mean "friendship" (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DefeatMeansFriendship) after all.

squiggit

2015-05-22, 10:42 AM

So... you're saying... that Beguilers shouldn't be on my list?!

TBH I have no idea why Beguilers are even the subject of this thread.

Moreover why "Beguiler vs Sorcerer" is the specific topic of discussion. Because there's a huge, giant gap between "worse than a sorcerer" and "garbage".

Grim Reader

2015-05-22, 10:55 AM

I think it got kicked off with someone saying Beguilers were the same tier as Wizards and Sorcerers, and had the same flexibility as a Wizard. People objected to the notion of the Beguiler having more versatility than the Wizard. Beguiler versus Sorcerer in versatility is a much more interesting discussion though. Versatility-only its not totally clear-cut.

Beguiler still lacks the gamebreaking tricks that are the gatekeeprs of T1 and T2 though.

Brova

2015-05-22, 09:36 PM

Beguiler still lacks the gamebreaking tricks that are the gatekeeprs of T1 and T2 though.

What list of broken tricks do you have that doesn't include "diplomacy"?

Story

2015-05-22, 11:10 PM

Well, since you probably didn't spend one of your third level slots on water breathing (since it is a terrible spell for a sorc), and since polymorph lasts minutes, we are probably both buying potions or asking the cleric or druid to memorize it.

I never said Sorcerors would be good at the challenges either. I mentioned Wizards and Druids, since Brova seemed to be comparing to T1s. But since you ask, Alter Self is 10 min/level. Whether a Sorcerer would actually spend a spell known on it, I don't know, but it is an option.

It has more MOVEMENT modes.

You also get a few other tricks like turning into a Rust Monster to destroy metal quickly. Or turn into a Hellwasp Swarm to temporarily possess bodies. Or a Green Hag to mimic animal sounds. And that's just the Monster Manual, I'm sure you kind find a lot more cool tricks by splat-diving.

Brova

2015-05-23, 08:05 AM

I never said Sorcerors would be good at the challenges either. I mentioned Wizards and Druids, since Brova seemed to be comparing to T1s.

I'm not saying that Beguilers should be T1. I'm saying that the tier system fails to rank classes in a way that is meaningful or effective.

Gnaeus

2015-05-23, 10:01 AM

I never said Sorcerors would be good at the challenges either. I mentioned Wizards and Druids, since Brova seemed to be comparing to T1s. But since you ask, Alter Self is 10 min/level. Whether a Sorcerer would actually spend a spell known on it, I don't know, but it is an option.

I'll leave that to Brova. Our positions are different. My position is that if Sorcerer is T2, so is Beguiler and DN.

And yes, I do expect the Sorc to take Alter Self, but I also expect him to retrain it at 8 when he gets polymorph, since there is a lot of overlap and he needs to cover a lot of ground with 11 spells, including 5 level 1s. If he keeps it, its almost entirely to get longer duration water breathing and movement modes. If he picks summon monster IV instead, I'll totally agree that he knows Alter Self.

You also get a few other tricks like turning into a Rust Monster to destroy metal quickly. Or turn into a Hellwasp Swarm to temporarily possess bodies. Or a Green Hag to mimic animal sounds. And that's just the Monster Manual, I'm sure you kind find a lot more cool tricks by splat-diving.

Know Dungeoneering, 12 HD (and Arcana, which he MAY have), Know Nature. If he even knows what a Green Hag is, why would he assume they can make animal sounds?

If he hasn't encountered those things in play, and he is splat diving for their special abilities, he is cheating. If he HAS encountered those in play, why are we assuming that the Sorc has met a Green Hag and a rust monster, but the Beguiler can't find a mid level fighter, rogue or barbarian? Heck, if Mr. low op sorcerers player wants to say I know what dragons are, right? I would even call that fair. But if he wants to know which subtypes have the right energy resistances or the best AC, I want to see some IC justification for things that he wouldn't know.

If I SEE a green hag, it is a DC18 Know Nature to know that it can mimic sounds. And I can't make that check untrained.

bekeleven

2015-05-23, 01:58 PM

Know Dungeoneering, 12 HD (and Arcana, which he MAY have), Know Nature. If he even knows what a Green Hag is, why would he assume they can make animal sounds?

If he hasn't encountered those things in play, and he is splat diving for their special abilities, he is cheating.

The form chosen must be that of an animal the druid is familiar with.

Not that
Can I cheat at D&D? Not by knowing a form I can polymorph into...

Gnaeus

2015-05-23, 02:08 PM

Can I cheat at D&D? Not by knowing a form I can polymorph into...

Speak

In general, speaking is a free action that you can perform even when it isn’t your turn. Speaking more than few sentences is generally beyond the limit of a free action.

I tell my party where we can find the spellbook of Fistandantalus. I know right where it is because I read these novels. It doesn't say in the description of Speak that I have to know what I am saying in character.

It doesn't say in the description of polymorph that you are instantly aware of every creature in all the monster manuals and all their powers. You know what you know. Knowing that a Green Hag has mimicry as an EX or that a red dragon is fire immune is clearly defined by a rule.

bekeleven

2015-05-23, 02:28 PM

I tell my party where we can find the spellbook of Fistandantalus. I know right where it is because I read these novels. It doesn't say in the description of Speak that I have to know what I am saying in character.

It doesn't say in the description of polymorph that you are instantly aware of every creature in all the monster manuals and all their powers. You know what you know. Knowing that a Green Hag has mimicry as an EX or that a red dragon is fire immune is clearly defined by a rule.

So characters in games you run are regularly unaware of their own special abilities?

If I adopted a baby green hag and raised it, how long until it realized it had this power?

Gnaeus

2015-05-23, 02:45 PM

So characters in games you run are regularly unaware of their own special abilities?

He isn't unaware of his own special abilities. He knows what his spell does. What he doesn't know is every monster in the world. The spell lets him turn into any aberration, animal, dragon, fey, giant, humanoid, magical beast, monstrous humanoid, ooze, plant, or vermin. It doesn't tell him what they all are. Or what powers they get. So he can:
1. restrict himself to the forms he has seen in play
2. optimize himself to pick up some knowledges to make some better use of his power.
3. make use of time in play to give himself actual knowledge of this stuff. He could turn into a white dragon and hit himself with elemental spells until he figures out what they are immune to, and repeat a lot. He could travel to a huge library in some big city and bribe a librarian to help him research strange stories of monsters. What exactly that would give him would be DM's call of course, and other PCs may be doing useful things with THEIR downtime as well.
4. Ask another PC. Polymorph IS less restrictive than Wildshape. It's not so much that he can't turn into a red dragon, as that why would he turn into a red dragon when confronted with fire attacks without an IC reason? That doesn't mean that the cleric standing next to him can't make an Arcana check, and use that speak action to convey information that he now actually knows IC.

Just because the fighter needs a large winged form with hands doesn't mean that anyone in the group has ever heard of an Abeil. Unless someone can make a knowledge Nature check at least.

If I adopted a baby green hag and raised it, how long until it realized it had this power?
An intriguing, if irrelevant question.

ShurikVch

2015-05-23, 02:52 PM

I wonder - what's happen if we take all those terrible classes and make one big gestalt? :smallamused:

Enchantment being a good drop choice has everything to do with mind-effecting immunity being extremely common. In a world without rampant immunity to the entire school* enchantment would be a powerful option. Crazily so, perhaps. A lot of the school's more reasonable effects suffer from enemies (and allies) needing to be immune to dominate and friends. :/

Illusion is gutted by Truesight. The shadow stuff can ignore / be empowered by Truesight, which is about the only high-op illusionist stuff you see running about.

*There is, to my knowledge, only one enchantment spell that doesn't have the descriptor - but that might not even matter as the description of the enchantment school says ALL enchantment spells are mind-effecting and the one exception never says it isn't mind effecting.Enchantment can affect Intelligence Undead via Song of the Dead metamagic

Illusion vs Truesight:
1. Truesight range is limited by 120'
2. Do You forget about the whole Phantasm sub-school?
3. Such spells as Dark Way, Hidden Ward, Nystul's Magic Aura, Silence, Khelben's Suspended Silence, and Misdirection are completely unaffected by Truesight; Screen may be at least partially effective, and Scintillating Pattern may work too

Gnaeus

2015-05-23, 02:58 PM

I wonder - what's happen if we take all those terrible classes and make one big gestalt? :smallamused:

Been there. Discussed that.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?321668-Which-is-better-a-T1-or-a-gestalt-of-all-T4-and-below-classes&highlight=gestalt+all+tier+classes

Edit: I'd skip to about page 5. Thats pretty much when we stopped talking in circles and began hammering out examples. My first concrete build was on page 7 & level 10 appears on page 9

I'd play it before a T1. Whether it IS T1 or whether it is better or worse depends a lot on how you define those terms.

bekeleven

2015-05-23, 03:25 PM

He isn't unaware of his own special abilities.Well, if he turns into a green hag, then he has Mimicry (Ex) under his special attacks header for the next minute/level. So it is, in fact, his own special ability.

An intriguing, if irrelevant question.If the answer is "one minute" then your polymorph caster learns 1m into his spell that he can mimic sounds.

If the answer is "1 year" then a character reincarnated into Green Hag form has that long to realize it.

Rules - yes, even house rules - have consequences.

Out of curiosity, what is the reason in your games that I can't polymorph into a creature with a template?

Gnaeus

2015-05-23, 03:43 PM

Well, if he turns into a green hag, then he has Mimicry (Ex) under his special attacks header for the next minute/level. So it is, in fact, his own special ability.

If the answer is "one minute" then your polymorph caster learns 1m into his spell that he can mimic sounds.

If the answer is "1 year" then a character reincarnated into Green Hag form has that long to realize it.

Rules - yes, even house rules - have consequences.

If you don't know what a Green Hag is, why did you polymorph into one?

Out of curiosity, what is the reason in your games that I can't polymorph into a creature with a template?

Same reason as in the rules I guess. Polymorph works like Alter Self and alter self says no templates IIRC.

bekeleven

2015-05-23, 04:08 PM

If you don't know what a Green Hag is, why did you polymorph into one?

Same reason as in the rules I guess. Polymorph works like Alter Self and alter self says no templates IIRC.

So the reason that you can't turn into a green hag is completely IC while the reason I can't turn into a draconic green hag is completely OOC.

If my character had encountered a draconic green hag, does that give me the knowledge to turn into a normal green hag, or no new forms at all?

sleepyphoenixx

2015-05-23, 05:27 PM

Gnaeus

2015-05-23, 05:27 PM

So the reason that you can't turn into a green hag is completely IC while the reason I can't turn into a draconic green hag is completely OOC.

If my character had encountered a draconic green hag, does that give me the knowledge to turn into a normal green hag, or no new forms at all?

The reason you can't turn into a draconic green hag is because it is beyond the abilities of polymorph. The reason, in this example, you can't turn into a green hag is that you have no idea what it is, and even if you had heard that there was a creature called a green hag, you have no reason to think that it has the particular ex you want in this situation. If you are fighting a green hag, and you think, "hey, that thing looks mean" and you polymorph your fighter into one now you have some IC knowledge. Heck, as you point out, it isn't wild shape. It is a lower standard. If some old fisherman tells you the coast is infested with green hags, and shows you a body, or a picture, maybe even gives a good description, you turn the fighter into a green hag. Then start working out what they can do. I'll buy that. Thats a mountain different than looking through the monster manual for specific forms with a character with average int and likely no relevant knowledges (or only Arcana).

As to your second question, maybe, I guess? Ask your DM. You certainly have a vastly better argument to make than "I have polymorph, now hand me that stack of monster manuals." Which, fundamentally, the WIZARD is able to do, because he is likely to have the character sheet that justifies it.

While we are on the subject, how many splat books do you get to dig through before it becomes equal optimization for the beguiler to pick up CDiv? Because the moment arcane disciple pops up I can copy your trick only better.

bekeleven

2015-05-23, 06:19 PM

The reason you can't turn into a draconic green hag is because it is beyond the abilities of polymorph.So you're justifying your IC delineation with OOC concepts. Cool. If a coast is infested with feral green hags, though, I'm out of luck.

While we are on the subject, how many splat books do you get to dig through before it becomes equal optimization for the beguiler to pick up CDiv? Because the moment arcane disciple pops up I can copy your trick only better.What trick?

Since we've been tap-dancing around this issue, Let me get philosophical for a moment and explain how I run polymorph. And summons.

A dragon's flying is (Na) and the tyrannosaurus's ability to swallow is (Ex). As the MM reminds us, (Ex) abilities are allowed to break the laws of physics. Natural abilities, however... there's a wrinkle. Because a dragon's wings can't possibly support him any more than his chest could actually safely combust, or freeze the air, or whatever else each flavor can do.

So D&D doesn't run on the laws of physics; the commoner railgun told us that already. Parts of it - elemental rules in particular - seem to point to a more platonic universal system.

Akasha (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akasha), also known as The Root, The Origin or (if shifting philosophies) Taiji (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiji_%28philosophy%29), created and continues to define the world. It's basically the source code to the universe. While most spells alter some corner of the universe, a Truenamer can access Akasha to change the nature of a thing, what it is and how it works. The Wish spell (among others) gives brief, unrestricted access to a wizard. The contact is too fast to change much, and certainly too fast to learn information incidental to the goal of the casting.

Templates, Summoning, and Polymorph

Every race has an entry in Akasha. For instance, every orc is essentially an instantiation of the platonic ideal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonic_idealism) of Orc, defined by its differences from that ideal than its differences from, say, a human. Another campaign setting could have this defined by one or more deities.

Conjurations bring manifestations of objects, creatures, or some form of energy to you (the summoning subschool), actually transport creatures from another plane of existence to your plane (calling), heal (healing), transport creatures or objects over great distances (teleportation), or create objects or effects on the spot (creation).
The summoning subschool doesn't summon an existing creature; we know that already, too. When you summon a bearded devil, you aren't literally grabbing one from hell. Instead, you're shaping aether into the form (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Forms) of a bearded devil. This is why they're always exactly the same. The prototypical bearded devil doesn't change. The only exception is fiendish and celestial animals, which are slightly altered based on the infusion of elemental evil or good.

Incidentally, this is why summoning a devil is an evil act: It's not that you're teleporting a devil from hell, getting him killed, and helping angels. It's that you're explicitly and tangibly increasing the amount of evil in the world, by creating a new form for evil to inhabit.

Back to Polymorph.

Polymorph allows a wizard (or sorcerer, shaman, Wu Jen, Hexblade...) to briefly touch Akasha. You can't touch it for long enough to take any information back with you; however, you can say, "I want a form that can fight." "I want a form that can fly and hold something." "I want a form that can eat a man." From that, Akasha shapes you - or allows you to shape yourself - into a Green Hag's platonic form, or an Abeil. Of course, if he knows what he's looking for, a mage can ask for a specific form. In fact, if you don't know what you're getting, you may not even know the name of the species you just turned yourself into (although you may get a bonus on any future knowledge checks!)

This neatly explains why you can't turn into a creature with a template. Templated creatures are not stored in Akasha; only plantonic forms of each race exist there.

And yes, I'm aware that this is a mishmash of half-baked philosophical ramblings. I've repurposed some existing concepts for my own worldbuilding and I'm fine with that.
A player in my games doesn't have to know any of that.

They just have to know "I should turn into an Abeil."

You seem content to rule that these spells work how they work through some mishmash of IC and OOC restrictions that step all over each other's toes and, man, more power to ya. But that's not how I run my games and it's not because I'm Cheating At D&D.TM

ExLibrisMortis

2015-05-23, 06:21 PM

A wizard's education suggests that they've had plenty of time to review a bestiary, or even just snatch a '10 monster powers you won't believe are real' pamphlet off a circus worker or whatever.

The problem with not using OOC knowledge of what monsters exist, is that your character has no reason to try to turn into something that doesn't exist, but that they believe exists (and is incredibly powerful). "I hear that the six-headed shattersnipe can shoot giant rock barrages through an at-will portal ring with 500 mile range! Also, they somehow always seem to know where there target is! Yes, my nanny always warned me of the six-headed shattersnipe, most dangerous of all shattersnipes!".

Brova

2015-05-23, 10:03 PM

Not to beat a dead horse or anything, but it seems kinda unrealistic to rank the power of a class on the assumption you'll get to use polymorph but not feats.

Grim Reader

2015-05-26, 06:17 AM

What list of broken tricks do you have that doesn't include "diplomacy"?

Genesis shenanigans. Loves Pain. Chain-gating. Flesh-to-Salt. Etc. I'm sure people can list a lot more.

Not to beat a dead horse or anything, but it seems kinda unrealistic to rank the power of a class on the assumption you'll get to use polymorph but not feats.

All classes get feats. Not all classes get polymorph. Remember, we are comparing classes. Also, feats tend to cancel out. Fighters, Barbarians and Rangers can all get Power Attack. It does not change their tier relative to each other. Beguilers, Sorcerer and Warmages can all get bloodline feats.

I'll leave that to Brova. Our positions are different. My position is that if Sorcerer is T2, so is Beguiler and DN.

Here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=khsp8f5dm6eucvrufnk9j80ls0&topic=5293) is the tier system. Here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?269440-Why-Each-Class-Is-In-Its-Tier-%28Rescued-from-MinMax%29) is why the Sorcerer is tier 2, and why the Beguiler is tier 3. Again, the Beguiler and the Sorcerer both have the versatility for tier 3, and the Sorcerer has the break-the-game potential to take it to tier 2.

Now, if you take away the game-breakers, the question of weather the Beguiler or the Sorcerer is more versatile becomes more interesting. The Beguiler is certainly better at the start of the game, level 1. Also, the Beguiler has a much higher floor than the Sorcerer. You can definitely fail to match the Beguiler through poor spell picks with a Sorcerer. The Beguiler is much harder to screw up. However, as the levels advance, the Sorcerer get more and more powerful spell options that the Beguiler do not get, while the Beguiler have a selection of solid spells that is a bit wider than what the Sorcerer can have, within a much more restricted area.

Basically, I'd say the Beguiler starts out more versatile but the better the player is at picking spells, the more the Sorcerer pulls away. You could probably make a skill of player vs power of character graph with the Sorcerer starting out lower than the Beguiler but having a much steeper curve past a certain level.

Brova

2015-05-26, 08:24 AM

Genesis shenanigans. Loves Pain. Chain-gating. Flesh-to-Salt. Etc. I'm sure people can list a lot more.

That doesn't answer the question. The fact that there are broken tricks other than diplomacy doesn't mean diplomacy isn't a broken trick. Also, the Beguiler's charm into diplomacy trick is more broken than those (in actual play) because it happens at a lower level. Messing around with genesis or gate requires 9th level spells (even chain binding requires 6th), love's pain requires either 9th level spells (mindrape, programmed amensia) or the massive legwork of finding someone who's dearest love is your target, flesh to salt is an infinite gold trick so it's only broken if items are broken and we can't rank items and it's a 5th level spell. On the other hand, the Beguiler can start making permanent minions of comparable or greater power than himself at level 2.

And of course, "how hard can you break the game" is an incredibly stupid way to rank classes. Both because nobody lets you break the game in actual play and because all classes are equally broken as long as candles of invocation exist.

All classes get feats. Not all classes get polymorph. Remember, we are comparing classes. Also, feats tend to cancel out. Fighters, Barbarians and Rangers can all get Power Attack. It does not change their tier relative to each other. Beguilers, Sorcerer and Warmages can all get bloodline feats.

A couple of things. First, this ivory tower "the class, the whole class, and nothing but the class" ranking strategy fails to capture how classes are actually played. Nobody takes more than 5 levels of Wizard, more than 6 levels of Fighter, or more than 6 levels of Sorcerer. I would point blank never play a Beguiler that didn't expand his spell list somehow, either by taking Arcane Disciple, becoming a Rainbow Servant, buying Runestaves, or becoming a Shadowcraft Mage. Or something else I'm forgetting. Second, even if we accept that we shouldn't count anything other than the class in general, the Beguiler has unique synergy with feats like Arcane Disciple or PrCs like Rainbow Servant. His casting mechanic makes certain choices more powerful, just like the Cleric's does (for example, it costs the Cleric nothing to be able to cast remove disease whereas it costs the Favored Soul a spell known, making remove disease a more powerful option for the Cleric). Finally, applying this ranking is massively misleading for a number of classes. For example, without feats the Incantatrix is a worse Wizard. He gives up an extra school of magic for literally nothing (okay, Seize Concentration at 6th).

Grim Reader

2015-05-26, 10:23 AM

....And of course, "how hard can you break the game" is an incredibly stupid way to rank classes. Both because nobody lets you break the game in actual play and because all classes are equally broken as long as candles of invocation exist.....

What I am getting from all that is that you do not contest that under the tier system, the Sorcerer is Tier 2 and the Beguiler tier 3, but that your objection is that the tier system is not an adequate simulation of how classes perform in actual play.

It would be interesting to make a thread that compares the Beguiler and the Sorcerer level-by-level. If the Sorcerers bag of gamebreakers get left at the door, the classes are much closer. I'm quite short on time this close to the summer, but I'll see if I can get my home computer to get me logged into the forums, and at least start one.

Gnaeus

2015-05-26, 11:48 AM

Here[/URL] is why the Sorcerer is tier 2, and why the Beguiler is tier 3. Again, the Beguiler and the Sorcerer both have the versatility for tier 3, and the Sorcerer has the break-the-game potential to take it to tier 2.

Now, if you take away the game-breakers, the question of weather the Beguiler or the Sorcerer is more versatile becomes more interesting.

Yes, Reaper, we know what the tier system says.

Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played with skill, can easily break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat or plenty of house rules, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party.

Examples: Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer, Erudite (Spell to Power Variant)

Tier 2: Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks, and while the class itself is capable of anything, no one build can actually do nearly as much as the Tier 1 classes. Still potentially campaign smashers by using the right abilities, but at the same time are more predictable and can't always have the right tool for the job. If the Tier 1 classes are countries with 10,000 nuclear weapons in their arsenal, these guys are countries with 10 nukes. Still dangerous and easily world shattering, but not in quite so many ways. Note that the Tier 2 classes are often less flexible than Tier 3 classes... it's just that their incredible potential power overwhelms their lack in flexibility.

Now, are they tier 1 and 2 because Red or because Green? For all the listed tier 1s and 2s, they are both. If Tier 1 & 2 are distinguished because nukes, tier system is irrelevant in 98% of games. If Tier 1 and 2 are distinguished by power and versatility in play (like the ability to obsolete many normal encounters or to do many things better than T5 classes specialized in that thing), I think Beguiler and DN are at least equal to Sorcerer at all but the absolute highest levels of optimization.

Somewhere, on brilliantgameologists, there is a conversation between JaronK and I where I bring up Arcane Disciple and he answers with Dragonwrought Kobold Loredrakes. My disagreement is not so much "what is Tier 1 and 2" and more "What is equivalent optimization between these two classes"

The stupid thing here is that this entire discussion just shows that I have too much time on my hands. The tier system is pretty good at what it is for. It shows that tier 1s and 2s are better than 4s and 5s and explains why. Talking about single tier gaps, it gets blurry around the edges. Equivalent optimization, which is unmeasurable and entirely opinion, is tough to quantify. Default tier system assumptions (like an inability to buy magic items freely, or the T1 ability to estimate their next days challenges with some accuracy) become a bigger issue in campaigns where those assumptions are not accurate.