PDA

View Full Version : PHB II Classes



Harkone
2007-05-15, 03:46 AM
I was looking over the base classes from the Player's Handbook II for a new campaign recently, and I couldn't help but notice that these four classes (Beguiler, Dragon Shaman, Duskblade, Knight) all seem very underpowered. Is it just me? I was wondering if anyone had any opinions on any of these four classes they'd like to share, and also if anyone has seen or homebrewed any alternative, possibly better versions of any of them. Thanks.

Armads
2007-05-15, 03:49 AM
The Beguiler is a full caster. It's not underpowered at all. The Duskblade is fine too. I'm not too sure about the Knight, but I find that 3 levels in quite a good dip.

Khantalas
2007-05-15, 03:50 AM
Well, underpowered compared to what? Beguiler is probably better than a fighter. So is a duskblade. They're probably all better than a bard or a monk.

When you compare them to, say, a druid, of course they'll look underpowered. Almost anything is underpowered compared to a druid or a wizard.

Harkone
2007-05-15, 04:00 AM
I meant underpowered compared to the closest/most similar PHB base class.
For example, a Sorcerer or Wizard seems more powerful than a Beguiler, a Bard more powerful than a Dragon Shaman, and a Fighter or Paladin more powerful than a Knight. As for Duskblade, the closest PHB equivalent would be some sort of Fighter/Sorcerer gish, which always seemed like a weak build to me (you do two things mediocre to poorly rather than one thing well).

Tengu
2007-05-15, 04:03 AM
Gish is not a jack-of-all-trades that knows both melee and magic, but both at a so-so level. A proper gish is a melee damage dealers that uses buffing spells and spells that can be channeled via attacking, and usually does better than a fighter.
Duskblade, from what I know, is a solid, good class. Far from underpowered.

Khantalas
2007-05-15, 04:06 AM
Well, first off, a Beguiler is not a sorcerer or wizard equivalent. Neither is the Dragon Shaman a bard equivalent. Hell, Dragon Shaman is there as a secondary warrior. And Beguiler is much closer to rogue / sorcerer rather than pure sorcerer. A Fighter or Paladin is probably not more powerful than Knight. And Duskblade's strength is not in doing two different things, it's the way it blends those two.

Well, seriously, next thing you know you'll tell me swordsages are overpowered.

CASTLEMIKE
2007-05-15, 04:08 AM
Beguiler is really good for the first level and pursuing the Ultimate Magus build.

Dausuul
2007-05-15, 04:13 AM
I meant underpowered compared to the closest/most similar PHB base class.
For example, a Sorcerer or Wizard seems more powerful than a Beguiler, a Bard more powerful than a Dragon Shaman, and a Fighter or Paladin more powerful than a Knight. As for Duskblade, the closest PHB equivalent would be some sort of Fighter/Sorcerer gish, which always seemed like a weak build to me (you do two things mediocre to poorly rather than one thing well).

Beguilers don't stack up to wizards, true, but not much does except clerics and druids. They compare pretty well with sorcs. Beguilers get far more spells known, plus some neat special abilities; the down side is that they don't have access to the utility spells sorcs do, and they're weak, though not helpless, against things that are immune to mind-affecting magic. I'd say it's a wash.

Dragon shamans I haven't looked at closely, so I don't know how they compare to bards, but I don't recall thinking dragon shamans were particularly weak.

Duskblades are quite effective gish. Don't underestimate that spell-channeling ability, it's huge. The currency of D&D combat is actions per round; being able to channel a spell through your weapon means you can cast a spell and attack at the same time, two actions for the price of one. I'd bet on a duskblade against a fighter any day of the week.

As for knights, they're much better than fighters for one simple reason: They can make the bad guys attack them! Early on, fighters serve an offensive role as well as a defensive one, but as the game progresses and casters come into their full brokenness, the fighter's role shifts to "tank for the casters," and that doesn't work very well when the monsters can just saunter right on past, ignoring the fighter entirely. The knight can make monsters pay attention to him. Plus it's a swift action, so it doesn't even cost the knight any attacks or movement.

Calsan
2007-05-15, 04:17 AM
I wouldn't say the knight is underpowered just diffrently oriented. Fighter is all about attack and offence mostly. Paladin is a mix of a "healer" and a fighter.

Knights are more oriented at defence and a lot of it. More fighting with the sword and shield style, just as offensive as a Paladin mostly maybe even on par with the Fighter. Don't forget more hp too, so underpowered I don't think so.

If you care about Damage/round then the fighter might be better (wizard at high lvls too) but if you care more about staying alive I'd say the knight is better.

Calsan
2007-05-15, 04:21 AM
As for knights, they're much better than fighters for one simple reason: They can make the bad guys attack them! Early on, fighters serve an offensive role as well as a defensive one, but as the game progresses and casters come into their full brokenness, the fighter's role shifts to "tank for the casters," and that doesn't work very well when the monsters can just saunter right on past, ignoring the fighter entirely. The knight can make monsters pay attention to him. Plus it's a swift action, so it doesn't even cost the knight any attacks or movement.


Wow, can't believe I missed that feature. Off course, he is the tank in the pure sence of the word. Making the enemies attack him.
Knights for everyone!

The J Pizzel
2007-05-15, 09:29 AM
Strangely enough, one of my last groups had a Duskblade, a Knight, a Dragon Shaman, a Wizard and a Cleric. Their effectiveness was incredible. The Knight took a hella beating and the Cleric was sorta a "backup tank", the Duskblade and Dragon Shaman were damage dealers while the Wizzie and Cleric took care of support. There only thing they lacked was an effective skill monkey, but they each took care of the skills one way or another. It was a damn good group.

To answer your question, the only class out of the PHBII I haven't seen played is a Beguiler, the other 3 don't appear underpowerd at all.

jp

ClericofPhwarrr
2007-05-15, 09:56 AM
I've had some experience with Beguilers. They are extremely powerful if you know what you're doing. In a city or more roleplay based game, they dominate any social situation, even more effectively than a bard could. They have the skill points of a bard, but their casting stat is Intelligence, which means they have far more skill points to put into the relevant skills. They also have a better class skill list IMO; there's very few things they can't specialize in, and all the skills that matter later on are there. They have better spells sooner, and more of them.

In a dungeon crawl, they're much reduced in effectiveness, but they still can manage fairly fine. Just be prepared for archery when you meet something with a high will save (or a golem... at least you have invisibility). They have trapfinding, and usually will have a high Search, so you can basically replace the normal rogue with a version that casts spells too. Sounds like a win-win to me.

VariaVespasa
2007-05-15, 10:02 AM
Beguilers do have limitations given their focus on mind-affecting stuff, but theyre very good within that role, and theyre AWESOME party support characters. Haste every fight, and lifesaving displacements and freedom of movements are indescribable goodness. If you dont like them as a PC I cant recommend them enough as a cohort for any non pure-arcane character. I'm playing in a City of the Spider Queen as a cleric at the moment, and my beguiler cohort has been indispensible so far, many sessions being the mvp.

And on the subject of CotSQ, we're hunting down the apparent big bad nasty drow priestess BBEG of the adventure, get to her home town, and find its under seige by fire giants? WTH??? I'm still trying to figure out what that curveball means... :) No spoilers please, I just had to share my bogglement. :)

Without spoilers, has anyone played through all of CotSQ? Was it fun for you? Was it surviveable? The writer appears to suffer from bouts of homicidal mania (un-foreshadowed banshee at lvl 11, shadow dragon at lvl 12, a horned devil at lvl 13, ouchie), so I was wondering... :P Only 2 deaths so far, both from the banshee wail, which was a seriously cheap shot, I thought. Non-spoiler comments appreciated. :)

Person_Man
2007-05-15, 10:14 AM
Dragon Shaman: Very weak. Lacks full BAB, so it can't be a tank. The aura's don't scale well enough to be useful at mid or high levels. The breath weapon isn't powerful enough to be a reliable blaster, even with metabreath feats. If you want to play a Dragon Shaman, play a Dragonfire Adept instead.

Knight: One of the best tanks in the game, second only to Crusaders, in my opinion. Put a small race on a medium mount. Use a lance two handed, and an animated shield. Use Test of Mettle to draw your enemies away. Let the rest of the party kill whoever passed their Save, and then come after everyone else one at a time. With your high AC, high hit points, reach, mobility, Mounted Combat to keep your riding dog alive, and decent charge damage, you're a big asset to any party. Also works quite well with Hexblade and/or Blackguard, as both are Cha based defensive classes that decrease your enemy's Saves.

Duskblade: Some of the best pure damage output in the game. Not amazing, but very fun, and more versatile then most melee classes in the game.

Beguiler: Every Skill Monkey should be a Beguiler. 8 Skill Points per level of a a huge list, including Use Magic Device. Trapfinding. Int based spontaneous full caster with a very impressive list, which is a lot more useful and potent then Sneak Attack. Plus improved ability to bypass SR, the bane of every caster.

So on balance, 3/4 of the PHBII classes are worth taking.

ClericofPhwarrr
2007-05-15, 10:38 AM
Put a small race on a medium mount. Use a lance two handed, and an animated shield. Use Test of Mettle to draw your enemies away. Let the rest of the party kill whoever passed their Save, and then come after everyone else one at a time.

Wait, are you saying to act as bait and lead your enemies around for a while? With the knight's code of conduct, I think I'd penalize you for that as a DM.

Also, Beguilers get 6+Int skill points per level, not 8. But with Int as their casting score, it's hardly a problem.

Everything else you said was gold.

Ramza00
2007-05-15, 11:43 AM
Wait, are you saying to act as bait and lead your enemies around for a while? With the knight's code of conduct, I think I'd penalize you for that as a DM.

Also, Beguilers get 6+Int skill points per level, not 8. But with Int as their casting score, it's hardly a problem.

Everything else you said was gold.

With Ride By Attack you can charge and then finish your move action without AoO. Bait and still attacking.

SpiderBrigade
2007-05-15, 11:52 AM
Yeah, the proposed tactic, as I understand it, isn't to make the enemy chase the knight while he runs. Rather, you're challenging them to face you in single combat and ignore the other party members. However that doesn't mean you have to stand toe-to-toe, especially if you're mounted. Rather (as has been mentioned) you harry them with repeated charges. Taunting is optional :smallbiggrin:

Merlin the Tuna
2007-05-15, 12:07 PM
Dragon Shaman: Very weak. Lacks full BAB, so it can't be a tank. The aura's don't scale well enough to be useful at mid or high levels. The breath weapon isn't powerful enough to be a reliable blaster, even with metabreath feats. If you want to play a Dragon Shaman, play a Dragonfire Adept instead. Agreed. It performs fairly well at low levels, but the higher you go, the more obviously ineffective the DS gets. Not bad for a quick dip, though -- two good saves and you pick up some auras.

Harkone
2007-05-15, 12:38 PM
Thanks for all the comments everyone. I really appreciate it.

I guess I just haven't seen enough of these classes in action. The only one I've DM'd was a Dragon Shaman around 9th level, and it seemed pretty weak (basically like a fighter-type that didn't hit very often and occasionally used its goofy powers; the party did not seem to get much from its aura ability either), but the consensus seems to be that the Dragon Shaman is the only weak one of the four PHB II classes. Any ideas on improving the Dragon Shaman? I would hesitate to give it the good BAB; are there any other options?

Person_Man
2007-05-15, 01:25 PM
Wait, are you saying to act as bait and lead your enemies around for a while? With the knight's code of conduct, I think I'd penalize you for that as a DM.

I think putting yourself out there and drawing off as many enemies as possible is a very noble.

The Knight already has the most stringent alignment code in the game. Not hitting flat footed opponents. No benefit from flanking. No lethal damage to helpless foes (which is a very broad category in D&D, because many spells render you "helpless.") Those are pretty serious restrictions.

If a PC is willing to play a Knight, that's a pretty big alignment burden. I wouldn't further burden them down by forcing them to use or not use specific tactics, especially when they work so well with their class abilities.

Also, as others have pointed out, an effective Knight will use the mounted combat feats to hit and move past his enemies, drawing them away from the more vulnerable players without just running away from them.


Any ideas on improving the Dragon Shaman? I would hesitate to give it the good BAB; are there any other options?

Yes, as I mentioned before, play a Dragonfire Adept (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060912a&page=2).

Similar Fluff.
Superior breath weapon that you can make your party members immune to, and use every round.
Battlefield control effects.
Invocations that mimic some of the best magical effects in the game.
Superior Skills, with better ability+Skill synergy.
No need to roll to attack, ever. So don't even worry about BAB, Str, attack feats, etc.
Since you never have to roll to attack and generally focus on social and scholar Skills, there's no reason to care about armor check penalties, so you can wear any armor you want.


The only thing you give up are your Aura's, which as we have already established, suck once you get to mid levels.

The_Snark
2007-05-16, 05:52 PM
Yes, as I mentioned before, play a Dragonfire Adept (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060912a&page=2).

Similar Fluff.
Superior breath weapon that you can make your party members immune to, and use every round.
Battlefield control effects.
Invocations that mimic some of the best magical effects in the game.
Superior Skills, with better ability+Skill synergy.
No need to roll to attack, ever. So don't even worry about BAB, Str, attack feats, etc.
Since you never have to roll to attack and generally focus on social and scholar Skills, there's no reason to care about armor check penalties, so you can wear any armor you want.


The only thing you give up are your Aura's, which as we have already established, suck once you get to mid levels.

Agreed on all but the point about the armor. Your invocations do suffer from arcane spell failure, and you don't even get the warlock's light-armor casting. Additionally, the armor will restrict your flight invocations, if you use those.

And I'm pretty sure the book that the Dragonfire Adept is in contains some other ways to get draconic auras, if you really miss the low-level auras.

ClericofPhwarrr
2007-05-16, 07:00 PM
Yeah, the proposed tactic, as I understand it, isn't to make the enemy chase the knight while he runs. Rather, you're challenging them to face you in single combat and ignore the other party members. However that doesn't mean you have to stand toe-to-toe, especially if you're mounted. Rather (as has been mentioned) you harry them with repeated charges. Taunting is optional :smallbiggrin:


I think putting yourself out there and drawing off as many enemies as possible is a very noble.

The Knight already has the most stringent alignment code in the game. Not hitting flat footed opponents. No benefit from flanking. No lethal damage to helpless foes (which is a very broad category in D&D, because many spells render you "helpless.") Those are pretty serious restrictions.

If a PC is willing to play a Knight, that's a pretty big alignment burden. I wouldn't further burden them down by forcing them to use or not use specific tactics, especially when they work so well with their class abilities.

Also, as others have pointed out, an effective Knight will use the mounted combat feats to hit and move past his enemies, drawing them away from the more vulnerable players without just running away from them.

Point conceded.

Lord Tataraus
2007-05-16, 07:34 PM
I agree with the Dragonfire Adept, and it doesn't get the light armor casting because it has natural armor.

TheThan
2007-05-16, 07:43 PM
Well since I never pass up the opportunity to promote my own work:

TheThan’s guide to duskblades (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18443&highlight=Duskblades) has a lot of information on how to make and play duskblades, however it is a bit unfinished (not enough time on my hands to finish all my numerous projects).

Person_Man
2007-05-16, 11:25 PM
Agreed on all but the point about the armor. Your invocations do suffer from arcane spell failure, and you don't even get the warlock's light-armor casting. Additionally, the armor will restrict your flight invocations, if you use those.

And I'm pretty sure the book that the Dragonfire Adept is in contains some other ways to get draconic auras, if you really miss the low-level auras.

Whoops. Right you are. I guess he has to buy bracers then.

OK, so in addition to auras, the Dragon Shaman also has superior AC. But since the Adept will spend most of its time flying 30 feet above the battlefield, I don't think its much of an issue for him.

The whole Bard/Marshal/Shaman thing is a bit sad really. Plenty of people want to play them for the fluff value, but for the most part, they're pretty meaningless once you get to mid levels. I guess we all just have to suck it up and learn White Raven Tactics like the cool kids.